ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications2024
A BIONIC HAND VS. A REPLANTED HAND.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Evaluation of the hand function affected when replacing a malfunctioning hand by a bionic hand. Design: Case report. Subjects: One individual that wished for a better quality of life after unsatisfying hand function following a replantation. Methods: A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of body functions as well as activity performance and participation before and after a planned amputation and prosthetic fitting is presented. Results: Improvements were seen in the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that were used regarding activity (Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure [COPM]), pain (Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory [NPSI], Brief Pain Inventory [BPI], Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]), cold intolerance (CISS) and health related quality of life (SF-36), as well as in the standardised grip function test, Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP). No referred sensations were seen but the discriminative touch on the forearm was improved. In the qualitative interview, a relief of pain, a lack of cold intolerance, improved appearance, better grip function and overall emotional wellbeing were expressed. Conclusions: The planned amputation and subsequent fitting and usage of a hand prosthesis were satisfying for the individual with positive effects on activity and participation. Clinical relevance: When the hand function after a hand replantation does not reach satisfactory levels, a planned amputation and a prosthetic hand can be the right solution.
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.