ArticleJournal of wrist surgery2026
Validation of a New Clinical Test for Diagnosis of Trapeziometacarpal Arthritis.
Article in Journal of wrist surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Symptomatic trapeziometacarpal arthrosis is primarily diagnosed on clinical grounds. The X-ray appearance correlates poorly with the presence and severity of pain; therefore, radiography is not a useful tool to define which patient is symptomatic, nor which one should be treated. There is not a specific gold standard test. The grind test is the most used clinical test; however, its level of diagnostic accuracy is not very high. The aim of this study is to describe and validate a new clinical test. Materials and Methods: A prospective study was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance and reliability of the compression and flexion test. Results: A total of 106 patients were included. Excellent interobserver agreement was found for both semiology tests (kappa = 0.82 and intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.97). The area under the curve for the compression and flexion test showed an estimate of 99.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 97.6-100) and for the grind test of 62 (95% CI: 51.2-71.9). The diagnostic performance of the compression and flexion test showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 92.1-99.9) and a specificity of 98.4% (95% CI: 91.2-100), in contrast to the grind test that reports a sensitivity of 22.2% (95% CI: 11.2-37.1) and a specificity of 93.4% [95% CI: 84.1-98.2]. Conclusions: The diagnostic performance of the compression and flexion test is higher than that of the grind test. Furthermore, the results show an excellent interobserver correlation and diagnostic accuracy, making it a useful clinical tool for the diagnosis of trapeziometacarpal arthritis. Type of Study/Level of Evidence: Diagnostic tests II.
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.