Skip to content

CMC (Carpometacarpal) OA (Osteoarthritis) Thumb Splint Study

Comparison of Two Carpometacarpal Stabilizing Splints for People With Thumb Osteoarthritis

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00705146
Enrollment
56
Registered
2008-06-25
Start date
2008-04-30
Completion date
2009-06-30
Last updated
2014-12-11

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Osteoarthritis

Keywords

Osteoarthritis, carpometacarpal joint, Thumb splints, AUSCAN-HI 3.1, Grip and pinch strength

Brief summary

Osteoarthritis (OA) of the thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) joint is a common condition that is seen regularly in outpatient occupational therapy and physiotherapy departments. Prevalence rates of symptomatic thumb OA have been found to be as high as 25%. The conservative treatment of choice consists of splinting. There are many different types of thumb splints available, but no specific guidelines as to which is preferred. There is limited evidence to support the benefits of splinting. The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of two different thumb splints: the Comfort Cool, a prefabricated neoprene splint and a custom made neoprene and thermoplastic thumb splint. These are two of the most commonly prescribed splints in local occupational therapy departments.

Detailed description

Thumb (CMC) osteoarthritis is treated conservatively with splinting. The objectives of splinting the CMC joint include stabilizing the joint, reducing pain symptoms as well as enhancing performance of everyday activities. There is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of splinting in reducing pain and very little evidence to support the effectiveness of thumb splints to enhance function. This CMC splint comparison study is a cross-over community based study of the effect of two different types of CMC stabilizing splints on patients with thumb OA. The objectives include measuring clients' OA symptoms and function using the Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN-HI 3.1), grip strength, pinch strength and client's personal splint preference on 4 separate occasions in order to compare the two thumb splints. The two splints differ in material and design. One splint is softer and incorporates more of the hand. The evidence gathered will support the effectiveness of specific splint design. It will also provide best practice guidelines for splint selection in clients with CMC OA. We are using a one group own control cross-over design where outcome measures will be taken at week 1, week 4, week 5 and week 9. Each client will wear both splints for a 4 week period separated by a 1 week wash out period. Procedure: First appointment: At the initial visit the client will be randomly assigned to splint order. The client will complete the AUSCAN-HI 3.1, and a grip and pinch strength measurement. The first CMC stabilizing splint will be fabricated and fitted as per normal splinting treatment for clients with CMC OA. The client will be instructed how to wear and care for their splint. General instructions will include wearing the splint for symptomatic use as well as heavy activities. Second visit: The second visit will take place 4 weeks after the first unless the client needs to come in earlier for a splint adjustment. At this time the AUSCAN-HI 3.1 will be administered again. Grip and pinch strength will also be re-measured. Third visit: After a one week wash-out period where the client does not wear any splint, they will attend the OT Outpatient department and complete the AUSCAN-HI 3.1, perform a grip and pinch strength measurement. They will be provided with the second CMC stabilizing splint and instructed in a wearing regime and the care of it. Fourth visit: This will take place at approximately 9 weeks, 4 weeks after wearing the second splint. The AUSCAN-HI 3.1 will be completed for the last time as well as a grip and pinch strength measurement. The client will also be asked their personal splint preference at this time. Data will be collected and input into the computer. Note: The procedures for grip and pinch strength measurement will follow the guidelines set out in the ASHT Clinical Assessment Recommendations. Data Analysis: Data will be analyzed using ANOVA, to determine if there is a significant difference between the 2 splints for OA pain, function, grip strength and personal preference.

Interventions

DEVICEComfort Cool thumb splint by North Coast Medical

Comfort Cool(TM) splint, a prefabricated neoprene splint, fit according to the participant's size (S, M, M+, L). Participants instructed to wear the splint when symptomatic, during manual tasks, and at night if desired. Used for 4 weeks. Treating therapists did not provide exercises or joint protection education until the final outcome measurement session at 9 weeks.

DEVICECustom made thermoplastic & neoprene splint

The Hybrid splint was based on Pat McKee's custom-made splint design, fabricated from neoprene and 1.6 mm Rolyan Aquaplast Watercolors (Bollingbrook, IL). Participants were instructed to wear the splint when symptomatic, during manual tasks, and at night if desired. Splint was worn for 4 weeks. Treating therapists did not provide exercises or joint protection education until the final outcome measurement session at 9 weeks.

Sponsors

Vancouver Foundation
CollaboratorOTHER
University of British Columbia
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
45 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* physician diagnosis of CMC OA * 45 years or older * able to read and write in English

Exclusion criteria

• previous thumb surgery

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Hand Function4 weeksHand Function was measured with the Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index 3.1 (AUSCAN). The AUSCAN is a self-report tool with 15 questions in 3 subscales: pain, function, joint stiffness, and uses an 11-point (0-10) numerical rating scale. The AUSCAN function subscale has 9 items regarding level of difficulty in performing daily tasks such as opening a jar, turning a doorknob, wringing out a washcloth. Possible scores range from 0 to 90. Mean change scores are reported (baseline compared to 4 weeks splint use). Higher scores indicate worse function.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pain4 weeksAUSCAN 3.1 pain subscale. Possible score range is 0 to 50. Lower scores indicate less pain. Change scores are reported (baseline to 4 weeks splint wear) for each of the two splints.

Countries

Canada

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Participants were recruited from 3 outpatient hand therapy departments on Vancouver Island from April 1, 2008 to April 30, 2009.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Hybrid Then Comfort Cool
Hybrid splint for 4 weeks, 1 wk washout, then Comfort Cool splint for 4 weeks
32
Comfort Cool Then Hybrid Splint
Comfort Cool splint for 4 weeks, 1 wk washout, then Hybrid splint for 4 weeks
24
Total56

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up11

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicComfort Cool Then Hybrid SplintHybrid Then Comfort CoolTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
13 Participants11 Participants24 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
11 Participants21 Participants32 Participants
Age, Continuous65.67 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.64
62.84 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.48
64.05 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.61
Region of Enrollment
Canada
24 participants32 participants56 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
22 Participants29 Participants51 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
2 Participants3 Participants5 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 320 / 24
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 320 / 24

Outcome results

Primary

Hand Function

Hand Function was measured with the Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index 3.1 (AUSCAN). The AUSCAN is a self-report tool with 15 questions in 3 subscales: pain, function, joint stiffness, and uses an 11-point (0-10) numerical rating scale. The AUSCAN function subscale has 9 items regarding level of difficulty in performing daily tasks such as opening a jar, turning a doorknob, wringing out a washcloth. Possible scores range from 0 to 90. Mean change scores are reported (baseline compared to 4 weeks splint use). Higher scores indicate worse function.

Time frame: 4 weeks

Population: Pooled participants from both arms from the phase they wore the hybrid splint, then from the phase they wore the comfort cool splint. Mean change scores are reported.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Hybrid SplintHand Function5.54 units on a scale
Comfort Cool SplintHand Function2.69 units on a scale
Secondary

Pain

AUSCAN 3.1 pain subscale. Possible score range is 0 to 50. Lower scores indicate less pain. Change scores are reported (baseline to 4 weeks splint wear) for each of the two splints.

Time frame: 4 weeks

Population: Pooled all participants for the phase they wore the hybrid, then comfort cool splints, respectively. Mean change scores are reported

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Hybrid SplintPain5.69 units on a scale
Comfort Cool SplintPain2.05 units on a scale

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026