Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Effectiveness of cast immobilization in comparison to the gold-standard self-removal orthotic intervention for closed mallet fingers: a randomized clinical trial
Tocco S, Boccolari P, Landi A, Leonelli C, Mercanti C, Pogliacomi F, Sartini S, Zingarello L, Nedelec B
Journal of Hand Therapy 2013 Jul-Sep;26(3):191-201
clinical trial
8/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. INTRODUCTION: Although orthotic immobilization has become the preferable treatment choice for closed mallet injuries, it is unclear whether orthosis self-removal has an impact on the final outcome. PURPOSE: To evaluate the treatment efficacy of cast immobilization of closed mallet fingers using Quickcast (QC) compared to a removable, lever-type thermoplastic orthosis (LTTP). METHODS: 57 subjects were randomized in 2 groups. DIPj extensor lag and the Gaberman success scale were used as primary outcomes. RESULTS: LTTP subjects resulted in greater extensor lag than QC subjects (mean 5 degrees; p = 0.05) at 12 weeks from baseline, and high edema and older age negatively affected DIPj extensor lag. No other differences were found between groups. CONCLUSION: Cast immobilization seems to be slightly more effective than the traditional approach probably for its greater capacity to reduce edema. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1B.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help