Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38635844›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2024

Three-dimensional imaging of the forearm and hand: A comparison between two 3D imaging systems.

Laura van Ginkel, Lotte Dupuis, Luc Verhamme, Erik Hermans, Thomas J J Maal, Vincent Stirler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 90% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 1 institution in 1 country.

Laura van GinkelDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7772-2333
Lotte DupuisDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6323-1189
Luc VerhammeRadboudumc 3D Lab, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Erik HermansDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Thomas J J MaalRadboudumc 3D Lab, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Vincent StirlerDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0745-0074
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The conventional treatment for distal radius fractures typically involves immobilization of the injured extremity using a conventional forearm cast. These casts do cause all sorts of discomfort during wear and impose life-style restrictions on the wearer. Personalized 3D printed splints, designed using three-dimensional (3D) imaging systems, might overcome these problems. To obtain a patient specific splint, commercially available 3D camera systems are utilized to capture patient extremities, generating 3D models for splint design. This study investigates the feasibility of utilizing a new camera system (SPENTYS) to capture 3D surface scans of the forearm for the design of 3D printed splints. In a prospective observational cohort study involving 17 healthy participants, we conducted repeated 3D imaging using both the new (SPENTYS) and a reference system (3dMD) to assess intersystem accuracy and repeatability. The intersystem accuracy of the SPENTYS system was determined by comparison of the 3D surface scans with the reference system (3dMD). Comparison of consecutive images acquired per device determined the repeatability. Feasibility was measured with system usability score questionnaires distributed among professionals. The mean absolute difference between the two systems was 0.44 mm (SD:0.25). The mean absolute difference of the repeatability of the reference -and the SPENTYS system was respectively 0.40 mm (SD: 0.30) and 0.53 mm (SD: 0.25). Both repeatability and intersystem differences were within the self-reported 1 mm. The workflow was considered easy and effective, emphasizing the potential of this approach within a workflow to obtain patient specific splint.

Identifiers

PMID38635844
PMCPMC11025912
OpenAlexW4394909289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.