Evaluation of Hand Function Using Relative Motion Extension Concept (with or Without Night Wrist Orthosis) or Dynamic...

Area of Science:

• Orthopedics
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Hand Surgery

Background:

• Extensor tendon injuries in zones 4-6 require effective rehabilitation protocols.
• Early motion is crucial for optimal functional recovery.
• Comparing different orthotic and motion approaches is essential for evidence-based practice.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare early active motion (EAM) via relative motion extension (RME) with early passive motion (EPM) using a dynamic extension orthosis (DEO).
• To assess the equivalence of RME-only versus RME-plus approaches.
• To evaluate functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and adherence.

Main Methods:

• Fifty adults with extensor tendon injuries (zones 4-6) were randomized into three groups: DEO, RME only, or RME plus orthosis.
• Outcomes measured included Jebsen-Taylor hand function test (JTHFT), QuickDASH, mobility, grip strength, Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM), adherence, and comfort.
• Assessments were conducted at T1 and T2.

Main Results:

• RME-only and RME-plus groups showed significantly better JTHFT, QuickDASH (T1), mobility (T1 & T2), and grip strength compared to the DEO group.
• No significant differences were found in PEM (T1 & T2), QuickDASH (T2), adherence, or comfort among the groups.
• RME-only and RME-plus protocols demonstrated equivalent outcomes.

Conclusions:

• The RME approach is superior to the DEO protocol for earlier hand function recovery after extensor tendon injuries in zones 4-6.
• Both DEO and RME protocols showed comparable patient adherence and satisfaction.
• The RME-only protocol is a safe and effective option for single extensor tendon injuries in zones 4-6.