Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34793566›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses for traumatic and chronic hand conditions: A scoping review.

T A M Oud, E Lazzari, H J H Gijsbers, M Gobbo, F Nollet, M A Brehm

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05320211 (Three-dimensional Printed Orthoses for Improving Daily Functioning in Chronic Hand Conditions), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05320211 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Three-dimensional Printed Orthoses for Improving Daily Functioning in Chronic Hand Conditions

TypeinterventionalSponsorAcademisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)Ran2022 to 2023Enrolled21ConditionsHand Injuries and DisordersArms3D-printed hand orthosis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Applications of 3D printing in orthopedics: a scoping review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

T A M OudAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7157-2514
E LazzariLaboratory of Clinical Integrative Physiology, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
H J H GijsbersAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M GobboLaboratory of Clinical Integrative Physiology, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
F NolletAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M A BrehmAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLUniversity of Brescia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the field of orthotics, the use of three-dimensional (3D) technology as an alternative to the conventional production process of orthoses is growing. PURPOSE: This scoping review aimed to systematically map and summarize studies assessing the effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses for traumatic and chronic hand conditions, and to identify knowledge gaps.

methodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, IEEE, and PEDro were searched for studies of any type of 3D-printed orthoses for traumatic and chronic hand conditions. Any outcome related to the effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses was considered. Two reviewers selected eligible studies, charted data on study characteristics by impairment type, and critically appraised the studies, except for case reports/series.

resultsSeventeen studies were included: four randomized controlled trials, four uncontrolled trials, four case series and five case reports. Only three studies had a sample size >20. Impairments described were forearm fractures (n = 5), spasticity (n = 5), muscle weakness (n = 4), joint contractures (n = 2) and pain (n = 1). Four poor to fair quality studies on forearm fractures supported the effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses on hand function, functionality, and satisfaction. One good quality study on spasticity demonstrated the effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses on hand function. One poor quality pain study reported limited positive effects on satisfaction. Studies on muscle weakness and joint contractures showed no benefits.

conclusionCurrent literature addressing the effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses for traumatic and chronic hand conditions consists primarily of small and poor methodological quality studies. There is a need for well-designed controlled trials including patient-related outcomes, production time and cost analyses.

Indexed as

HandHumansJoint DislocationsMuscle WeaknessOrthotic DevicesPainPrinting, Three-DimensionalRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID34793566
PMCPMC8601455
OpenAlexW3211902859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.