-
British Journal of Sports Medicine May 2021To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise compared with other conservative interventions in the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) on pain and function. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Exercise interventions in lateral elbow tendinopathy have better outcomes than passive interventions, but the effects are small: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 2123 subjects in 30 trials.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise compared with other conservative interventions in the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) on pain and function.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess risk of bias and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to grade the certainty of evidence. Self-perceived improvement, pain intensity, pain-free grip strength (PFGS) and elbow disability were used as primary outcome measures.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
RCTs assessing the effectiveness of exercise alone or as an additive intervention compared with passive interventions, wait-and-see or injections in patients with LET.
RESULTS
30 RCTs (2123 participants, 5 comparator interventions) were identified. Exercise outperformed (low certainty) corticosteroid injections in all outcomes at all time points except short-term pain reduction. Clinically significant differences were found in PFGS at short-term (mean difference (MD): 12.15, (95% CI) 1.69 to 22.6), mid-term (MD: 22.45, 95% CI 3.63 to 41.3) and long-term follow-up (MD: 18, 95% CI 11.17 to 24.84). Statistically significant differences (very low certainty) for exercise compared with wait-and-see were found only in self-perceived improvement at short-term, pain reduction and elbow disability at short-term and long-term follow-up. Substantial heterogeneity in descriptions of equipment, load, duration and frequency of exercise programmes were evident.
CONCLUSIONS
Low and very low certainty evidence suggests exercise is effective compared with passive interventions with or without invasive treatment in LET, but the effect is small.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42018082703.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Bias; Cryotherapy; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Pinch Strength; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tennis Elbow; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonic Therapy; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 33148599
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102525 -
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2021Donor site morbidity following radial forearm flap (RFF) harvest remains a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the question "Are the range... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Donor site morbidity following radial forearm flap (RFF) harvest remains a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the question "Are the range of wrist movements (range of motion, ROM) and hand strength affected after RFF harvesting?" The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched (to December 2019). Self-controlled studies evaluating hand biomechanics after RFF harvest were included. Weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model. The outcome variables were ROM, forearm movements, grip, and pinch strengths. Thirteen studies involving a total of 335 patients were included. With the exception of grip strength and supination, which showed statistically significant reductions of about 2.40 kg and 2.86° (P < 0.05), all other ROM, forearm movements, and pinch strengths showed an insignificant difference when the operated hand was compared to the non-operated hand (P > 0.05). Regression analysis showed that the method of donor site closure and size of the donor site defect had an insignificant impact on hand biomechanics. This study confirms the lack of discernible biomechanical morbidity after RFF transfer. The minimal reduction in hand biomechanics after RFF is considered to be clinically negligible.
Topics: Humans; Biomechanical Phenomena; Forearm; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Range of Motion, Articular; Surgical Flaps; Tissue and Organ Harvesting
PubMed: 32665139
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2020.06.016 -
Journal of Wrist Surgery Jun 2020A common notion is that more complex techniques for treating trapeziometacarpal arthritis such as ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) better...
A common notion is that more complex techniques for treating trapeziometacarpal arthritis such as ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) better preserve the scaphometacarpal (SMC) space compared to a simple trapeziectomy and that this leads to superior functional outcomes. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the relationship between scaphometacarpal space and objective outcomes such as grip and pinch strength as well as subjective patient-reported outcomes. A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting SMC space and outcomes after surgery for carpometacarpal arthritis. The primary outcomes of these studies included any measure of postoperative scaphometacarpal space (trapezial height/trapezial index) as well as key pinch strength, grip strength, or lateral pinch strength. Studies that did not assess for association between SMC space and outcomes were excluded. Fourteen studies were included in this systematic review. Three (21.4%) studies found a statistically significant correlation between postoperative SMC space and postoperative pinch or grip strength. The correlation was weakly positive in one study (key pinch vs. scaphometacarpal space, = 0.13), positive but unlisted in another (lateral pinch vs. trapezial ratio), and negative in the third study (key pinch vs. trapezial space ratio, = -0.47). Preservation of the SMC space postoperatively is not associated with postoperative outcomes. Further research is necessary to better characterize the importance of maintaining the SMC space in patients undergoing LRTI in order to substantiate claims by proponents of the procedure.
PubMed: 32509434
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1692477 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Apr 2020Endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) both have advantages and disadvantages for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) both have advantages and disadvantages for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). We compared the effectiveness and safety of ECTR and OCTR based on evidence from a high-level randomized controlled trial.
METHODS
We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Medline to identify relevant articles published until August 2019. Data regarding operative time, grip strength, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire scores, digital sensation, patient satisfaction, key pinch strength, return to work time, and complications were extracted and compared. All mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) were expressed as ECTR relative to OCTR.
RESULTS
Our meta-analysis contained twenty-eight studies. ECTR was associated with significantly higher satisfaction rates (MD, 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43 to 4.82; P = 0.0003), greater key pinch strengths (MD, 0.79 kg; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.32; P = 0.003), earlier return to work times (MD, - 7.25 days; 95% CI, - 14.31 to - 0.19; P = 0.04), higher transient nerve injury rates (OR, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.37 to 17.25; P = 0.01), and a lower incidence of scar-related complications (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.59; P = 0.004). The permanent nerve injury showed no significant differences between the two methods (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 0.58 to 6.40; P = 0.28).
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that ECTR results in better recovery of daily life functions compared to OCTR, as revealed by higher satisfaction rates, greater key pinch strengths, earlier return to work times, and fewer scar-related complications. Our findings suggest that patients with CTS can be effectively managed with ECTR.
Topics: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Decompression, Surgical; Endoscopy; Hand Strength; Humans; Neurosurgical Procedures; Operative Time; Patient Satisfaction; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Return to Work; Safety; Surveys and Questionnaires; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32340621
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-020-03306-1 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Strength training or aerobic exercise programmes, or both, might optimise muscle and cardiorespiratory function and prevent additional disuse atrophy and deconditioning... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Strength training or aerobic exercise programmes, or both, might optimise muscle and cardiorespiratory function and prevent additional disuse atrophy and deconditioning in people with a muscle disease. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2013. We undertook an update to incorporate new evidence in this active area of research.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of strength training and aerobic exercise training in people with a muscle disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Neuromuscular's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL in November 2018 and clinical trials registries in December 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs or cross-over RCTs comparing strength or aerobic exercise training, or both lasting at least six weeks, to no training in people with a well-described muscle disease diagnosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 trials of aerobic exercise, strength training, or both, with an exercise duration of eight to 52 weeks, which included 428 participants with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD), dermatomyositis, polymyositis, mitochondrial myopathy, Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), or myotonic dystrophy. Risk of bias was variable, as blinding of participants was not possible, some trials did not blind outcome assessors, and some did not use an intention-to-treat analysis. Strength training compared to no training (3 trials) For participants with FSHD (35 participants), there was low-certainty evidence of little or no effect on dynamic strength of elbow flexors (MD 1.2 kgF, 95% CI -0.2 to 2.6), on isometric strength of elbow flexors (MD 0.5 kgF, 95% CI -0.7 to 1.8), and ankle dorsiflexors (MD 0.4 kgF, 95% CI -2.4 to 3.2), and on dynamic strength of ankle dorsiflexors (MD -0.4 kgF, 95% CI -2.3 to 1.4). For participants with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (35 participants), there was very low-certainty evidence of a slight improvement in isometric wrist extensor strength (MD 8.0 N, 95% CI 0.7 to 15.3) and of little or no effect on hand grip force (MD 6.0 N, 95% CI -6.7 to 18.7), pinch grip force (MD 1.0 N, 95% CI -3.3 to 5.3) and isometric wrist flexor force (MD 7.0 N, 95% CI -3.4 to 17.4). Aerobic exercise training compared to no training (5 trials) For participants with DMD there was very low-certainty evidence regarding the number of leg revolutions (MD 14.0, 95% CI -89.0 to 117.0; 23 participants) or arm revolutions (MD 34.8, 95% CI -68.2 to 137.8; 23 participants), during an assisted six-minute cycle test, and very low-certainty evidence regarding muscle strength (MD 1.7, 95% CI -1.9 to 5.3; 15 participants). For participants with FSHD, there was low-certainty evidence of improvement in aerobic capacity (MD 1.1 L/min, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.8, 38 participants) and of little or no effect on knee extension strength (MD 0.1 kg, 95% CI -0.7 to 0.9, 52 participants). For participants with dermatomyositis and polymyositis (14 participants), there was very low-certainty evidence regarding aerobic capacity (MD 14.6, 95% CI -1.0 to 30.2). Combined aerobic exercise and strength training compared to no training (6 trials) For participants with juvenile dermatomyositis (26 participants) there was low-certainty evidence of an improvement in knee extensor strength on the right (MD 36.0 N, 95% CI 25.0 to 47.1) and left (MD 17 N 95% CI 0.5 to 33.5), but low-certainty evidence of little or no effect on maximum force of hip flexors on the right (MD -9.0 N, 95% CI -22.4 to 4.4) or left (MD 6.0 N, 95% CI -6.6 to 18.6). This trial also provided low-certainty evidence of a slight decrease of aerobic capacity (MD -1.2 min, 95% CI -1.6 to 0.9). For participants with dermatomyositis and polymyositis (21 participants), we found very low-certainty evidence for slight increases in muscle strength as measured by dynamic strength of knee extensors on the right (MD 2.5 kg, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.3) and on the left (MD 2.7 kg, 95% CI 2.0 to 3.4) and no clear effect in isometric muscle strength of eight different muscles (MD 1.0, 95% CI -1.1 to 3.1). There was very low-certainty evidence that there may be an increase in aerobic capacity, as measured with time to exhaustion in an incremental cycle test (17.5 min, 95% CI 8.0 to 27.0) and power performed at VO max (maximal oxygen uptake) (18 W, 95% CI 15.0 to 21.0). For participants with mitochondrial myopathy (18 participants), we found very low-certainty evidence regarding shoulder muscle (MD -5.0 kg, 95% CI -14.7 to 4.7), pectoralis major muscle (MD 6.4 kg, 95% CI -2.9 to 15.7), and anterior arm muscle strength (MD 7.3 kg, 95% CI -2.9 to 17.5). We found very low-certainty evidence regarding aerobic capacity, as measured with mean time cycled (MD 23.7 min, 95% CI 2.6 to 44.8) and mean distance cycled until exhaustion (MD 9.7 km, 95% CI 1.5 to 17.9). One trial in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (35 participants) did not provide data on muscle strength or aerobic capacity following combined training. In this trial, muscle strength deteriorated in one person and one person had worse daytime sleepiness (very low-certainty evidence). For participants with FSHD (16 participants), we found very low-certainty evidence regarding muscle strength, aerobic capacity and VO peak; the results were very imprecise. Most trials reported no adverse events other than muscle soreness or joint complaints (low- to very low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence regarding strength training and aerobic exercise interventions remains uncertain. Evidence suggests that strength training alone may have little or no effect, and that aerobic exercise training alone may lead to a possible improvement in aerobic capacity, but only for participants with FSHD. For combined aerobic exercise and strength training, there may be slight increases in muscle strength and aerobic capacity for people with dermatomyositis and polymyositis, and a slight decrease in aerobic capacity and increase in muscle strength for people with juvenile dermatomyositis. More research with robust methodology and greater numbers of participants is still required.
Topics: Dermatomyositis; Exercise; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Muscle Strength; Muscular Diseases; Muscular Dystrophies; Muscular Dystrophy, Facioscapulohumeral; Myotonic Dystrophy; Physical Fitness; Polymyositis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Resistance Training
PubMed: 31808555
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003907.pub5 -
Injury Aug 2019Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Bennett fractures is increasingly preferred over closed reduction and percutaneous fixation (CRIF) in an attempt to...
PURPOSE
Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Bennett fractures is increasingly preferred over closed reduction and percutaneous fixation (CRIF) in an attempt to prevent the development of post-traumatic arthrosis. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether the preference for ORIF is justified based on the available literature regarding functional outcome and complications after surgery.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of science, and Google scholar. Duplicates were removed and title and abstract were screened after which full text articles were analysed. The reference lists of selected articles were screened for additional relevant studies. Study characteristics were recorded and methodological qualities were assessed after which data was extracted from the included articles. The Eaton-Littler score for post-traumatic arthrosis (primary outcome) on follow-up X-rays was used as primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were Grip strength, Pinch strength, persistent pain, fixation failure, functional impairment, infection and surgery time.
RESULTS
Ten studies were included; three retrospective comparative studies and seven retrospective case series. Of the 215 patients in these studies, 138 had been treated using an open technique and 77 by a closed percutaneous technique. The pooled rate of post-traumatic arthrosis was 57.5% (26.6-85.5) in the ORIF group versus 26.1% (3.9-59.0) in the CRIF group. Mean surgical operation time was 71.9 min for ORIF and 30.2 min for percutaneous patients. Fixation failure was significantly more often seen in the ORIF patients, 8.2% (0.7-22.8) vs. 2.9% (0.8-9.1), Risk Ratio 1.132 (0.01-176.745); p = 0.048. Infection was only seen in 5 CRIF patients. Persistent pain was seen in 32.9% (0.6-83.1) in ORIF patients versus 22.3% (8.1-41.1) in the CRIF patients. The pooled means Grip strength was 48.3 kg (95% CI; 39.7-56.9) versus 43.4 kg (95% CI; 22.9-63.8) for ORIF and CRPF, respectively. Functional impairment was similar between the two groups, 1.4% (0.1-4.4) vs 1.8% (0.1-5.7) respectively.
CONCLUSION
The analysed data do not confirm ORIF to prevent post-traumatic arthrosis, secondly more fixation failure and pain was seen in the ORIF group. The pooled data show percutaneous fixation to be preferable over ORIF in the surgical treatment of Bennett fractures.
Topics: Biomechanical Phenomena; Closed Fracture Reduction; Fracture Dislocation; Fracture Healing; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Metacarpal Bones; Open Fracture Reduction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31288938
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.06.027 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Mar 2021To decrease the time to reinnervation of the intrinsic motor end plates after high ulnar nerve injuries, a supercharged end-to-side (SETS) anterior interosseous to...
To decrease the time to reinnervation of the intrinsic motor end plates after high ulnar nerve injuries, a supercharged end-to-side (SETS) anterior interosseous to ulnar motor nerve transfer has been proposed. The purpose of this study was to compile and review the indications, outcomes, and complications of SETS anterior interosseous to ulnar motor nerve transfer. A literature search was performed, identifying 73 papers; 4 of which met inclusion and exclusion criteria, including 78 patients. Papers included were those that contained the results of SETS between the years 2000 and 2018. Data were pooled and analyzed focusing on the primary outcomes: intrinsic muscle recovery and complications. Four studies with 78 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most patients (33.3%) underwent SETS for an ulnar nerve lesion in continuity, the average age was 46.5 years, and the average follow-up was 10 months. The average duration of symptoms before surgery was 99 weeks, all patients had weakness and numbness, nearly all (96%) had atrophy, and half (53%) had pain. Grip and key pinch strength improved 202% and 179%, respectively, from the preoperative assessment. The vast majority (91.9%) recovered intrinsic function at an average of 3.7 months. Other than 8% of patients who did not recover intrinsic strength, no other complications were reported in any of the 78 patients. The SETS is a successful procedure with low morbidity, which may restore intrinsic function in patients with proximal nerve injuries.
Topics: Arm; Hand Strength; Humans; Middle Aged; Nerve Transfer; Ulnar Nerve; Ulnar Neuropathies
PubMed: 30924361
DOI: 10.1177/1558944719836213 -
Acta Bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis Oct 2018ring avulsion are relatively common hand lesions and are associated with significant disability, especially in hand-workers. The treatment choice is still debatable. We...
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE WORK
ring avulsion are relatively common hand lesions and are associated with significant disability, especially in hand-workers. The treatment choice is still debatable. We sought to conduct a detailed systematic review in attempt to collate evidence on functional, cosmetic and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following ray amputation for the management of traumatic hand injury and ring avulsion injury.
METHODS
using the PubMed database we made a systematic search for articles regarding single ray amputation after traumatic hand lesion. Nine articles met our including criteria and were analysed.
RESULTS
most of the included studies suggest that for those worse cases ray amputation still represent a good option. Indeed ray resection can eliminate the gap, remove a cumbersome or painful digit and guarantes better cosmesis but reduces grip and pinch strength (from 15% to 30%) and decreased palm width.
CONCLUSIONS
different surgical techniques are available, almost all of them results in a loss of strength but ensure good both functional and cosmetic results.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Amputation, Traumatic; Degloving Injuries; Finger Injuries; Finger Phalanges; Fingers; Fractures, Bone; Hand Bones; Hand Injuries; Hand Strength; Humans; Ischemia; Jewelry; Recovery of Function
PubMed: 30714994
DOI: 10.23750/abm.v90i1-S.7677 -
The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery Nov 2018The goal of this study was to compare the two types of orthoses, prefabricated soft splints versus short thermoplastic custom-made splints, that are the most commonly... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The goal of this study was to compare the two types of orthoses, prefabricated soft splints versus short thermoplastic custom-made splints, that are the most commonly used for the management of first carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS
We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review in the literature based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We extracted the outcomes of disability scores, pain scores, grip and pinch strength and gathered the unified data accordingly.
RESULTS
We included five randomized clinical trials with 230 patients with the mean age of 61 years and the mean follow-up of 8.1 weeks. The results of the pooled data demonstrated only a statistically significant difference in disability scores among splints in favor of the prefabricated splints. The rest of the outcome measures consisting of pain, grip strength, and pinch strength were not statistically different.
CONCLUSION
According to our systematic review and meta-analysis, both thumb-based splints improved pain and function in the first CMC OA in a short-term follow-up, nevertheless the efficacy of prefabricated splints in abatement of disability scores was significantly higher than custom-made splints. In contrast, the other outcome measures including pain, grip and pinch strength were improved identically after wearing either of the splints.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
II.
PubMed: 30637302
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018Rheumatoid arthritis is an inflammatory polyarthritis that frequently affects the hands and wrists. Hand exercises are prescribed to improve mobility and strength, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rheumatoid arthritis is an inflammatory polyarthritis that frequently affects the hands and wrists. Hand exercises are prescribed to improve mobility and strength, and thereby hand function.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of hand exercise in adults with rheumatoid arthritis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), OTseeker, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) up to July 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered all randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared hand exercise with any non-exercise therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as outlined by the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven studies involving 841 people (aged 20 to 94 years) in the review. Most studies used validated diagnostic criteria and involved home programmes.Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from one study indicated uncertainty about whether exercise improves hand function in the short term (< 3 months). On a 0 to 80 points hand function test (higher scores mean better function), the exercise group (n = 11) scored 76.1 points and control group (n = 13) scored 75 points.Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study indicated that exercise compared to usual care probably slightly improves hand function (mean difference (MD) 4.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.58 to 7.42; n = 449) in the medium term (3 to 11 months) and in the long term (12 months or beyond) (MD 4.3, 95% CI 0.86 to 7.74; n = 438). The absolute change on a 0-to-100 hand function scale (higher scores mean better function) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) were 5% (95% CI 2% to 7%); 8 (95% CI 5 to 20) and 4% (95% CI 1% to 8%); 9 (95% CI 6 to 27), respectively. A 4% to 5% improvement indicates a minimal clinical benefit.Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from two studies indicated uncertainty about whether exercise compared to no treatment improved pain (MD -27.98, 95% CI -48.93 to -7.03; n = 124) in the short term. The absolute change on a 0-to-100-millimetre scale (higher scores mean more pain) was -28% (95% CI -49% to -7%) and NNTB 2 (95% CI 2 to 11).Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study indicated that there is probably little or no difference between exercise and usual care on pain in the medium (MD -2.8, 95% CI - 6.96 to 1.36; n = 445) and long term (MD -3.7, 95% CI -8.1 to 0.7; n = 437). On a 0-to-100 scale, the absolute changes were -3% (95% CI -7% to 2%) and -4% (95% CI -8% to 1%), respectively.Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from three studies (n = 141) indicated uncertainty about whether exercise compared to no treatment improved grip strength in the short term. The standardised mean difference for the left hand was 0.44 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.78), re-expressed as 3.5 kg (95% CI 0.87 to 6.1); and for the right hand 0.46 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.8), re-expressed as 4 kg (95% CI 1.13 to 7).High-quality evidence from one study showed that exercise compared to usual care has little or no benefit on mean grip strength (in kg) of both hands in the medium term (MD 1.4, 95% CI -0.27 to 3.07; n = 400), relative change 11% (95% CI -2% to 13%); and in the long term (MD 1.2, 95% CI -0.62 to 3.02; n = 355), relative change 9% (95% CI -5% to 23%).Very low-quality evidence (due to risk of bias and imprecision) from two studies (n = 120) indicated uncertainty about whether exercise compared to no treatment improved pinch strength (in kg) in the short term. The MD and relative change for the left and right hands were 0.51 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.9) and 44% (95% CI 11% to 78%); and 0.82 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.21) and 68% (95% CI 36% to 101%).High-quality evidence from one study showed that exercise compared to usual care has little or no benefit on mean pinch strength of both hands in the medium (MD 0.3, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.74; n = 396) and long term (MD 0.4, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.88; n = 351). The relative changes were 8% (95% CI -4% to 19%) and 10% (95% CI -2% to 22%).No study evaluated the American College of Rheumatology 50 criteria.Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study indicated that people who also received exercise with strategies for adherence were probably more adherent than those who received routine care alone in the medium term (risk ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.48; n = 438) and NNTB 6 (95% CI 4 to 10). In the long term, the risk ratio was 1.09 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.28; n = 422).Moderate-quality evidence (due to risk of bias) from one study (n = 246) indicated no adverse events with exercising. The other six studies did not report adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is uncertain whether exercise improves hand function or pain in the short term. It probably slightly improves function but has little or no difference on pain in the medium and long term. It is uncertain whether exercise improves grip and pinch strength in the short term, and probably has little or no difference in the medium and long term. The ACR50 response is unknown. People who received exercise with adherence strategies were probably more adherent in the medium term than who did not receive exercise, but with little or no difference in the long term. Hand exercise probably does not lead to adverse events. Future research should consider hand and wrist function as their primary outcome, describe exercise following the TIDieR guidelines, and evaluate behavioural strategies.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Exercise Therapy; Hand; Hand Strength; Humans; Middle Aged; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 30063798
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003832.pub3