Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Outcome analysis of conservative treatment of a distal radius fracture with OPTIVOhand orthosis versus plaster cast: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDistal radius fractures (DRF) are often immobilized using a conventional plaster cast although orthoses offer a time- and resource-saving alternative. This prospective randomized study compared the conservative DRF treatment using an orthosis (OPTIVOhand METHODS/
design53 patients with isolated DRF were randomized to the orthosis group (OG) or the control group (CG). The follow-up examinations included radiological, clinical, and functional evaluations (ROM, grip strength, DASH score, SF-36) as well as patient satisfaction questionnaire.
results41 of the 53 patients included (OG: n = 21, CG: n = 20) were followed up until the 12 months follow-up. The rate of secondary dislocations was comparable in both groups (OG: n = 3; CG: n = 2; p > 0.05). Additionally, the OG showed significantly (p < 0.05) better subjective function (DASH score) 6 weeks and 3 months after injury, and a higher quality of life (SF-36 physical component summary) at 2 and 6 week follow-up. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in OG and mean application time was significantly shorter (OG: 02:35 min vs. CG: 07:35 min; p < 0.001).
conclusionThis study's functional and radiological results on conservative DRF treatment did not reveal a significant difference in maintenance of reduction result between modern orthoses and conventional plaster casts, while achieving higher patient satisfaction. Hence, orthoses offer a good alternative to plaster casts, especially for stable fracture types.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register, Identifier: DRKS00017695. Trial registration date 04.11.2019, ( https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00017695 ).
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.