A Comparative Study of Splint Effectiveness in Limiting Forearm Rotation

Slaughter, Adrienne; Miles, Lyn; Fleming, Jennifer; McPhail, Steven

doi:10.1016/j.jht.2010.02.003

« Previous Next »Journal of Hand Therapy
Volume 23, Issue 3 , Pages 241-248, July 2010

A Comparative Study of Splint Effectiveness in Limiting Forearm Rotation

Presented by the first author (AS) at the following conferences: Queensland Hand Surgeons' Society Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, November 21–23, 2008, and Australian Hand Therapy Association Conference, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, October 16–18, 2009.

Occupational Therapy Department, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia

Occupational Therapy Department, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Queensland, Australia

Hand Therapy Clinics, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Occupational Therapy Department, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia

Centre for Functioning, Disability and Health, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia

School of Public Health, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland, Australia

published online 26 April 2010.

Abstract

Study Design

Case Study Series.

Introduction

Restriction of forearm rotation may be required for effective management and rehabilitation of the upper limb after trauma.

Purpose of the Study

To compare the effectiveness of four splints in restricting forearm rotation.

Methods

Muenster, Sugartong, antipronation distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ), and standard wrist splints were fabricated for five healthy participants. Active range of motion (AROM) in forearm pronation and supination was measured with a goniometer for each splint, at the initial point of sensory feedback and during exertion of maximal force.

Results

Repeated-measures analysis of variance indicated significant differences between splints for all four AROM measures. Post hoc paired t-tests showed that the Sugartong splint was significantly more restrictive in pronation than the Muenster splint. The antipronation DRUJ splint provided significantly greater restriction in pronation than the standard wrist splint. No splints immobilized the forearm completely.

Conclusions

The Sugartong splint is recommended for maximal restriction in pronation, but individual patient characteristics require consideration in splint choice.