ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Quantitative assessment of the tendon-pulley interface in trigger finger: a pilot feasibility study of a wearable electrical contact resistance sensor.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrigger finger (stenosing tenosynovitis) reflects abnormal tendon-pulley mechanics, primarily at the A1 pulley; however, objective assessment during functional motion remains limited in routine clinical practice. We evaluated electrical contact resistance (ECR) from a wearable tactile sensor during standardized digit motion and examined its association with symptoms.
methodsNine participants with Green grade II-III trigger finger were prospectively enrolled. An origami-inspired pentagon-knot graphene-paper tactile sensor measured ECR over the A1 and A2 pulleys during repeated flexion-extension cycles. A 4-week intervention program (electrical stimulation plus infrared irradiation; three sessions per week) enabled repeated measurements. ECR and patient-reported outcomes were collected at weekly Tuesday assessments, with ECR recorded immediately before and after the session (ECR
resultsSensor placement and recording were feasible, with no adverse events. Across 27 paired weekly sessions (Weeks 1-4), ECR decreased from pre- to post-session at both pulleys (model-estimated mean ΔECR
conclusionsWearable ECR sensing was safe and feasible in this pilot study and demonstrated consistent within-session responsiveness. Clinically, motion-acquired ECR may serve as an objective adjunct for tracking session-level changes and week-to-week status with symptom scales.
trial registrationRetrospectively registered at ChiCTR (ChiCTR2600120811 approved).
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.