3D-Printed Hand Orthosis Versus Thermoplastic Orthosis

NCT ID: NCT05896410

Last Updated: 2023-06-12

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

10 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-06-01

Study Completion Date

2023-08-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

This study will investigate the effectiveness of 3D-printed splints for treating thumb osteoarthritis (CMC OA). These splints are made by Occupational Therapists and Physical Therapists out of low-temperature plastic and formed on the patient's hand. 3D printed splints involve photographing the hand and creating a digital file of the splint. This is then printed and fit on the patient.

The goal of this cross-over clinical trial is to compare the effectiveness of 3D-printed splints versus thermoplastic splints for treating thumb osteoarthritis (CMC OA).

The main question\[s\] it aims to answer are:

Primary objective:

• Evaluate the general useability and possible benefits of splint production by 3D printing in a clinical setting

Secondary objectives:

* Compare the effectiveness of 3D printed orthosis and the low-temperature plastic fabrication manual method in pain reduction
* Compare the effectiveness of 3D printed orthosis and the low-temperature plastic fabrication manual method in improving the function.
* Compare the satisfaction of patients with the 3D printed orthosis and low-temperature plastic fabrication manual method.
* Compare the length of time needed to fabricate each orthosis
* Compare the weight of orthosis

Participants will provide with two splints (traditional orthosis and 3D-printed orthoses). Participants will use the first orthosis for three weeks, be given a week for washout, and then cross over to the second orthosis.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Non-surgical treatment is the initial consideration for symptomatic carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA). Immobilization with orthosis (splint) is one of the methods of non-surgical treatment. The evidence is mounting regarding the effectiveness of orthosis in OA of the thumb. A recent systematic review indicated that splinting causes a moderate to large effect on pain. However, a recent network meta-analysis showed that a short thermoplastic CMC splint is the best treatment to increase function.

The variations of the recommended orthosis for immobilization of the CMC are varied from the neoprene splints to the rigid thermoplastic material. However, the patient's satisfaction with these materials is different. Patients reported more satisfaction with neoprene thumb splints but found custom-made splints more functional.

Hand therapists typically use low-temperature thermoplastic materials (LTTP) for orthosis fabrication.

3D-printed orthoses are emerging as an alternative for immobilizing joints. Different studies tried to compare the two methods of the 3D printed orthosis with a thermoplastic orthosis and reported some advantages for a 3D printed orthosis. These studies reported advantages including being lighter in weight, producing less incidence of skin irritation, offering better hygiene with less odour and perspiration, appealing and custom-tailored aesthetic design, and the ability to use recycled affordable materials. Furthermore, the fabrication of thermoplastic orthosis needs expertise and knowledge, which require specialized training to fabricate and are time-consuming, expensive, difficult to keep clean, bulky, cumbersome, and unable to tolerate moisture at high temperatures. Also, the thermoplastic material is subject to cracking, requiring the patient to go through the healthcare system again and return to the clinic just for a therapist to make another splint. Off-the-shelf splints have better breathability and longevity but cost more and are often less form-fitting or stabilizing than a therapist-made splint. Despite the numerous advantages of the 3D printed splint listed in the literature, the high cost of equipment, lack of training and skill of clinicians and the long time required for production limited their use in hand therapy.

Progress has been made in developing the 3D of orthoses. Potential advantages include comfort, well-fitting, adequate ventilation in the splint and a clean production process. However, there are challenges in reducing the reliance on the in-person evaluation given the complex geometries of the hand, unavailability of high-resolution scanners, fabrication time that may require multiple visits and cost, equipment materials and expertise. Accurate and high-resolution 3D scanners are available on the market and are currently used in research studies. Different scanners are being used in the literature to scan the hand. Different steps are required to fabricate a 3D printed orthosis, including scanning the body segment with a 3D scanner, CT scan or MRI; transferring the scanned data to a computer modelling software program; printing the orthosis; and finishing/adjusting the final product. The time needed to scan the affected upper limb ranged from 1 to 3 minutes. The time needed to modify the scanned digital file in a computer-aided design software program to be ready for 3D printing was reported to take approximately 1 hour. Only one study reported a 53% reduction in total fabrication time with a 3D-printed orthosis compared with a traditional orthosis.

Few studies compared 3D-printed orthosis with traditional orthosis fabrication in the clinical setting. The reported outcome measures are Outcome measures pain, overall satisfaction, and function. More satisfaction, less skin irritation, itchiness and odour; however, none utilize patients with CMC OA as participants. Chu et al. used 3D hand parametric modelling techniques to create customized designs of short thumb orthoses in healthy adults. They reported that the 3D-printed orthosis provided greater flexibility of hand movement and stronger support than the traditional, manually formed orthosis.

There is a gap in evidence regarding the clinical utility and feasibility of using 3D printing versus traditional orthosis in patients with CMC joint OA.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Thumb Osteoarthritis CMC Splints

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

CROSSOVER

In this study, participants act as their controls; traditional orthosis and 3D-printed orthoses. The order of intervention and testing conditions will be determined by drawing a concealed envelope from a bag . The testing protocol will be started after the fitting of orthoses. Participants will use the first orthosis for three weeks, be given a week for washout, and then cross over to the second orthosis. The participants should use the second orthosis for three weeks. All participants will be informed about the research details, and the measurements will be explained and demonstrated to the participant and provided signed informed consent before participation. Patients will receive identical orthotic-wearing instructions. Patients will be asked to use the orthosis during the daytime functional activities and ADLs for at least half of their waking hours. All patients will be asked to report any pain, discomfort, or skin irritations when using the orthosis.
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Thermoplastic Splint(orthosis)

A static hand-based splint (orthosis) made with a thermoplastic material that immobilizes the CMC and MCP joint will be used.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

splint (orthosis)

Intervention Type DEVICE

3D printed splint (orthosis) help prevent the joint from shifting during pinch activities. This reduces improper joint loading and helps reduce pain and the progression of degenerative change in patients with OA.

3D printed splint (orthosis)

A static hand-based 3D-printed splint (orthosis) made with 3D printing that immobilizes both the CMC and MCP joint will be used.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

splint (orthosis)

Intervention Type DEVICE

3D printed splint (orthosis) help prevent the joint from shifting during pinch activities. This reduces improper joint loading and helps reduce pain and the progression of degenerative change in patients with OA.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

splint (orthosis)

3D printed splint (orthosis) help prevent the joint from shifting during pinch activities. This reduces improper joint loading and helps reduce pain and the progression of degenerative change in patients with OA.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

3D printed splint (orthosis)

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* At least 18 years old,
* able to provide written informed consent
* indicating immobilization of CMC as part of their therapy. The orthosis treatment can be in any part of their treatment (first users or the patients with experience of using orthosis).

Patients will be excluded if

* have skin irritation, blister, or wound.
* have neurologic conditions affecting their pain perception in the upper limb.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Western University, Canada

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

122173

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.