ArticleWork (Reading, Mass.)2023
Functional capacity of individuals with brachial plexus injury.
Article in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Musculoskeletal complaints, physical work demands, and functional capacity in individuals with a brachial plexus injury: An exploratory study.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo enable (pain free) functioning, individuals with brachial plexus injury (BPI) may require a higher functional capacity compared to two-handed individuals, because the load on unaffected structures is greater.
objectiveThis study compared the functional capacity of individuals with BPI and healthy controls and explored differences in the functional capacity of BPI-affected individuals with respect to: those with and without hand function; affected and unaffected sides; with and without musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs).
methodsSix functional capacity tests adjusted for one-handed function were performed by 23 BPI-affected individuals and 20 healthy controls. Hand function was assessed through physical examination and the Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire was used to assess MSCs.
resultsIndividuals with BPI scored lower for the two-handed tests, compared with the controls (p≤0.01, effect size (r) ≤-0.41 for both tests). However, both groups performed similar in the one-handed tests. On average individuals with BPI met the physical demands to perform sedentary to light physical work. Among BPI-affected individuals, two-handed overhead lifting capacity was higher in those with hand function than in those without hand function (p = 0.02; r = 0.33). Functional capacity tended to be lower for the unaffected side than for the affected side (4 tests; p≤0.05, r≤-0.36). Test results of BPI-affected Individuals with and without MSCs were similar.
conclusionIndividuals with BPI demonstrated lower two-handed functional capacity than healthy controls. Effect sizes were medium. Capacity of their unaffected side was similar to the dominant side of controls. No association was found between MSCs and functional capacity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.