ArticleHand therapy2021
Compression gloves for patients with hand arthritis (C-GLOVES): A feasibility study.
Article in Hand therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01874067 (C-GLOVES), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
C-GLOVES: an Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Compression Gloves in Arthritis: a Feasibility Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Compression gloves are frequently provided to patients with hand arthritis. Evidence for effectiveness is limited. The aim of this study was to determine feasibility of recruitment, assessment and treatment procedures, in preparation for a future compression glove trial. Methods: A non-randomised feasibility study with out-patients with either undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis or hand osteoarthritis, with moderate to severe hand pain. All received Isotoner™ compression gloves provided by rheumatology occupational therapists. The main outcomes were feasibility of recruitment, assessment and treatment procedures, trial outcome selection and sample size calculation. Participants were assessed at baseline and four weeks. Assessments included: numeric rating scales (0-10) of hand pain (on activity, at rest, at night) and stiffness; hand joint swelling; finger flexion; and hand function (Grip Ability Test). Results: Of 318 patients screened, 86/204 (42%) of inflammatory and 68/114 (60%) of hand osteoarthritis patients were eligible. Of these, 41 (48%: age: 59.10 (SD 12.54) years) and 32 (47%: age: 60.75 (SD 8.64) years) respectively, consented. All completed four-week follow-up. Assessment and treatment protocols were feasible. Hand pain on activity and at night, stiffness, joint swelling, finger flexion and hand function improved: e.g. hand pain on activity: inflammatory arthritis change = -0.95 (SD 2.26; p = 0.01); osteoarthritis -1.57 (SD 1.78; p = 0.001). Participants reported improved hand pain, stiffness and hand function as main benefits. Conclusion: Procedures tested were feasible. The most relevant primary outcome was hand pain on activity. Future trials would need 161 participants (Inflammatory arthritis) and 151 (hand osteoarthritis).
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.