Conventional vs 3-Dimensional Printed Cast Wear Comfort

Area of Science:

• Orthopedics
• Biomedical Engineering
• Rehabilitation Medicine

Background:

• Conventional immobilization methods for upper extremity injuries can present challenges with patient comfort and fit.
• Advancements in additive manufacturing offer potential for custom-fit orthotic devices.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the functional performance of 3-dimensional (3D) printed orthoses against conventional fiberglass casts for upper extremity immobilization.
• To evaluate patient-reported outcomes, including comfort and perceived function, between the two immobilization methods.

Main Methods:

• A comparative study involving twelve healthy volunteers assessed custom 3D printed short arm casts versus standard fiberglass short arm casts.
• Objective functional assessment utilized the Jebsen Hand Function Test (JHFT), while subjective outcomes were measured using a modified Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE).
• Skin complications and cast fit were also monitored and recorded for each participant.

Main Results:

• Objective hand function, as measured by the JHFT, showed no significant difference between 3D printed and fiberglass casts.
• A notable subset of participants in the 3D cast group achieved normal task completion times, not observed in the fiberglass group.
• Patient-reported outcomes favored the 3D printed casts, with significantly lower PRWE function scores (45.5 vs. 80.8) and reduced incidence of skin irritation (8% vs. 42%).

Conclusions:

• Both 3D printed and conventional fiberglass casting techniques provide similar objective functional outcomes for upper extremity immobilization.
• 3D printed orthoses demonstrate a significant advantage in patient satisfaction, comfort, and perceived functional ability compared to fiberglass casts.
• Custom 3D printing represents a promising alternative for upper extremity immobilization, enhancing the patient experience and potentially reducing complications.