Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37904731›Full record

ArticleHand therapy2022

Variation in patient information and rehabilitation regimens after flexor tendon repair in the United Kingdom.

Lisa Newington, Jennifer Ce Lane, David Gw Holmes, Matthew D Gardiner

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hand therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lisa NewingtonHand Therapy, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6954-2981
Jennifer Ce LaneNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
David Gw HolmesTrauma and Orthopaedics, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Foundation Trust, Aintree, Liverpool, UK.
Matthew D GardinerNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBWexham Park Hospital · GB

Funding

Versus Arthritis 21605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: There is clinical uncertainty regarding the optimal method of rehabilitation following flexor tendon repair. Many splint designs and rehabilitation regimens are reported in the literature; however, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of any one regimen. The aim of this study was to describe rehabilitation guidelines used in the United Kingdom (UK) following zone I/II flexor tendon repair. Methods: Using a cross-sectional design, hand units in the UK were invited to complete a short survey and to upload their flexor tendon rehabilitation guidelines and patient information material. Approval was granted by the British Association of Hand Therapists. Data were extracted in duplicate, using a pre-piloted form, and analysed using descriptive statistics. Results: Thirty-five hand units responded (21%), providing 52 treatment guidelines. Three splinting regimens were described, and all involved early active mobilisation: (i) long dorsal-blocking splint (DBS); (ii) short DBS; and (iii) relative motion flexion splint. Duration of full-time splint wear ranged from 4 to 6 weeks. There were variations in splint design and composition of home exercise programmes, particularly for the long DBS. Where reported, recommended return to driving ranged from 8 to 12 weeks, and return to light work activities ranged from 5 to 10 weeks. Discussion: Treatment guidelines varied across UK hand therapy departments, suggesting that patients receive differing advice about how to protect, move and use their hand after zone I/II flexor tendon repair. The disparity in splint wear duration, home exercise frequency and prescribed functional restrictions raises potential financial and social implications for patients. Future research should explore rehabilitation burden in addition to clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

flexor tendon repairRehabilitationreturn to drivingreturn to worktreatment guidelines

Identifiers

PMID37904731
PMCPMC10584046
OpenAlexW4226369360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.