Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial registered on ANZCTR
Registration number
ACTRN12620000355976
Ethics application status
Approved
Date submitted
25/02/2020
Date registered
12/03/2020
Date last updated
12/03/2020
Date data sharing statement initially provided
12/03/2020
Date results provided
12/03/2020
Type of registration
Retrospectively registered
Titles & IDs
Public title
The comparison of 3D printed and thermoplastic oval eight finger orthoses: A randomised crossover trial.
Query!
Scientific title
The comparison of 3D printed and thermoplastic oval eight finger orthoses in a healthy cohort, a comparison of hand function, occupational performance and satisfaction, and orthoses characteristics : A randomised crossover trial.
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
300642
0
Nil known
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
The use of this orthosis is to prevent hyper extension of the PIPJ when injured through varied conditions including central slip injury
316425
0
Query!
boutonniere deformity
316593
0
Query!
dislocation
316594
0
Query!
Rheumatoid arthritis.
316595
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Physical Medicine / Rehabilitation
314684
314684
0
0
Query!
Occupational therapy
Query!
Inflammatory and Immune System
314820
314820
0
0
Query!
Rheumatoid arthritis
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Participants were randomised to wear either a 3D printed or a thermoplastic oval eight finger orthosis for 24-hours, given a 24-hour washout period, followed by wearing the second orthosis for a further 24-hours.
A 3D printed orthosis was created by the principal investigator, who created the orthosis initially on a CAD program and then printed via a desktop 3D printer, Lulzbot mini, using ABS 2mm filament. Each participant had there finger measured using a tape measure, at the middle and proximal phalanx of the index finger, and these measurement were input to the CAD program to create the custom made orthosis. The print time was approximately 30 minutes and then any minor rough aspects were smoothed with fine grit sandpaper.
The thermoplastic was created by the principal investigator using current best practice methods. A 10 cm piece of Aquaplast thermoplastic was heated in a heat bath at 70 degrees. Once softened the participant was asked to rest their elbow on the table with their hand directly above, the principal investigator then molded the thermoplastic to the index finger at the PIPJ, creating the currently used orthosis. Any excess thermoplastic material was cut away.
Once the two orthosis were created by the principal investigator the second investigator took all baseline measurement, with orthosis in place.
The participant was randomised to wearing one of the two orthosis initially, which they were given verbal and written instructions on correct wearing and safety. The participant then wore the orthosis for 24 hours. They were then contacted by phone by the second investigator and outcome measures taken. The participant had a 24 hour washout period of not wearing an orthosis. The participant then wore the second of the two orthosis for a further 24 hours, again at the end of the wear period they were contact by phone by the second investigator to complete the outcome measures.
The participant attended a secure room at the university to have the orthosis fitted, and base line measures completed. The participant wore the orthosis in their standard day to day life, and were contacted at a convenient time by phone to collect outcome measures.
The participant were given a daily diary to write down any occasions that they removed the orthosis in the 24 hour wear period, and for what reason, they then read this to the second investigator when contacted by phone.
Query!
Intervention code [1]
316973
0
Treatment: Devices
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Cross over design: Participants were exposed to both the traditional orthosis (thermoplastic) and the new intervention, 3D printed orthosis.
Query!
Control group
Active
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
323011
0
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
323011
0
Query!
Timepoint [1]
323011
0
after 24 hour wear period of each orthosis
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
380516
0
Grip strength of the hand using a Jamar Dynam0meter, handle position 2, three attempts taken and the average strength recorded.
Query!
Assessment method [1]
380516
0
Query!
Timepoint [1]
380516
0
at baseline with each orthosis on situ.
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
380867
0
Tip to tip strength, using pinch gauge. Tip of index finger and tip of thumb, three attempts taken and average.
Query!
Assessment method [2]
380867
0
Query!
Timepoint [2]
380867
0
At baseline with each orthosis in situ.
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
380868
0
Range of motion (ROM) of the PIPJ. A 15cm plastic gonimoter used to measure full extension and flexion of the PIPJ of the finger.
Query!
Assessment method [3]
380868
0
Query!
Timepoint [3]
380868
0
AT base line with orthosis in situ.
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
Over 18 years of age, a staff member or student from the Occupational Therapy course at an Australian University and were able to provide informed consent, no current (acute) hand injury.
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Yes
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
Unable to wear a finger orthosis for a total of 48 hours or had a current upper limb injury or condition, or were unable to read or understand English
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
central randomisation by phone/fax/computer
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Online randomisation tool.
Query!
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Crossover
Query!
Other design features
Participants provided a washout period of 24 hours between wearing each orthosis.
Query!
Phase
Not Applicable
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Efficacy
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Data was tested for normal distribution using The Shapiro-Wilk test (Field, 2013). Descriptive statistics, Paired t-tests for parametric data (Taylor, 2017) and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for non-parametric data (Taylor, 2017) were used to analyse differences between the two orthoses in hand function data, performance and satisfaction components of the COPM, as well as results from the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire. Qualitative data gathered from the COPM and Client Satisfaction Questionnaire were analysed using conceptual content analysis to enrich quantitative findings (Schreier, 2012).
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
27/06/2019
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
6/09/2019
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
20/09/2019
Query!
Sample size
Target
15
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
25
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
VIC
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
29479
0
3220 - Geelong
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1]
305066
0
University
Query!
Name [1]
305066
0
Deakin University
Query!
Address [1]
305066
0
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria, Australia 3220
Query!
Country [1]
305066
0
Australia
Query!
Primary sponsor type
University
Query!
Name
Deakin University
Query!
Address
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria, Australia, 3220
Query!
Country
Australia
Query!
Secondary sponsor category [1]
305433
0
None
Query!
Name [1]
305433
0
Query!
Address [1]
305433
0
Query!
Country [1]
305433
0
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Approved
Query!
Ethics committee name [1]
305454
0
Deakin University, Faculty of Health Human Ethics Advisory Group
Query!
Ethics committee address [1]
305454
0
Deakin University Locked Bag 20000 Geelong VIC 3220
Query!
Ethics committee country [1]
305454
0
Australia
Query!
Date submitted for ethics approval [1]
305454
0
Query!
Approval date [1]
305454
0
27/06/2019
Query!
Ethics approval number [1]
305454
0
HEAG-H 58_2019
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
The first aim of this study is to compare hand function in terms of range of motion, tip pinch strength and hand grip strength, when wearing the 3D printed and thermoplastic finger orthosis. The null hypothesis is there is no difference in each of the hand function measures between the two orthoses. The second aim is to investigate the impact that wearing a 3D printed and a thermoplastic orthosis has on everyday activities. The null hypothesis is there is no difference in occupational performance and satisfaction between the two orthoses. Lastly, the third aim is to investigate client satisfaction of wearing the two orthoses in terms of appearance, comfort, convenience, durability and water retention. The null hypothesis is there is no difference in each of the client satisfaction questionnaire items between the two orthoses
Query!
Trial website
-
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
-
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
100438
0
Mr Pearse Patrick Andrew Fay
Query!
Address
100438
0
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria, 3220
Query!
Country
100438
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
100438
0
+61 352278322
Query!
Fax
100438
0
Query!
Email
100438
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
100439
0
Pearse Patrick Andrew Fay
Query!
Address
100439
0
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria 3220
Query!
Country
100439
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
100439
0
+61 352278322
Query!
Fax
100439
0
Query!
Email
100439
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Name
100440
0
Pearse Patrick Andrew Fay
Query!
Address
100440
0
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria 3220
Query!
Country
100440
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
100440
0
+61 352278322
Query!
Fax
100440
0
Query!
Email
100440
0
[email protected]
Query!
Data sharing statement
Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?
Yes
Query!
What data in particular will be shared?
Raw data of results is available upon request.
Query!
When will data be available (start and end dates)?
October 2019 - No end date
Query!
Available to whom?
Publicly available upon request
Query!
Available for what types of analyses?
Viewing of raw data for evidence of statistical analysis
Query!
How or where can data be obtained?
Data can be requested from the principal investigator via email request,
[email protected]
.
Query!
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Results publications and other study-related documents
Documents added manually
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Documents added automatically
No additional documents have been identified.
Download to PDF