ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 2435

Lumbrical Splinting and Stretching Versus Standard Treatment On Grip, Pinch, and Dexterity in People with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Nancy A. Baker1, Krissy Moehling2, Elaine Rubinstein3, Norman Gustafson4 and Mark Baratz5, 1Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 2Department of Family Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, 3Department of Measurement, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 4University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 5Alleghancy General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Carpal tunnel syndrome, exercise and orthotics

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Title: Physical/Occupational Therapy and Exercise in Patients with Rhematologic Disease

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ARHP)

Background/Purpose:

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a prevalent peripheral upper extremity neuropathy.  Splinting and exercise is often recommended for those with mild to moderate symptoms. Lumbrical muscles of the hand appear to affect carpal tunnel canal pressure and CTS symptoms. We hypothesized that a lumbrical intensive treatment of nocturnal splinting and stretching exercises would provide greater improvements in impairments than less lumbrical intensive treatments.

Methods:

A randomized controlled 2×2 factorial design study was conducted with four groups: Lumbrical splint/Lumbrical stretch (Lsp/Lst); General splint/Lumbrical stretch (Gsp/Lst); Lumbrical splint/General stretch (Lsp/Gst); General splint/General stretch (Gsp/Gst). Appropriate patients with mild/moderate CTS were recruited by 2 hand surgeons.

Assessments were obtained at baseline and 4 weeks after completion of an at-home regimen of splinting and exercise. Grip strength and lateral and palmar pinch were measured using standardized assessment tools. Fine motor dexterity was evaluated using the Purdue Pegboard.

Results:

The average age of this cohort (N=103) was 53.3±11.8 years. The majority were female (71.8%), with chronic carpal tunnel symptoms ≥ 3 months (85.7%). As CTS was most prevalent for the right (43.7%) or bilateral hand (38.8%) and the majority were right handed (91.3%), only right-sided results are provided for strength measurements (Table 1). There were no significant differences in demographics between groups.

2-way ANOVAs were performed using SPSS 18 with group as the between-subjects factor and time as the within-subjects factor. Post hoc analyses used pairwise comparisons on difference scores for significant between-group outcomes with alpha set at .05.   We calculated a Cohen’s D to identify the clinical effect of the intervention. 

The main effect of time was significant for all but Purdue – both hands. When analyzing group by time interactions the only outcomes with significant changes were right lateral pinch (p=.03) with greatest improvement in the Gsp/Gst group, and Purdue – left hand only (p=.03) with greatest improvement in the Lsp/Lst group.  Overall the group using the GSP/GST demonstrated the greatest clinical improvements (small to moderate D). 

Conclusion:

All groups showed significant improvements over time regardless of treatment.  Intensive lumbrical treatment was significantly better only for Purdue left hand, however, dexterity tasks such as Purdue both hands and Purdue assembly also showed greater improvement for this group (D scores were small to moderate). It appears that a more intensive lumbrical treatment may affect dexterity more than strength at 4 weeks follow-up. Future CTS research should examine the effects of more intensive lumbrical treatments on impairments over a longer follow-up period.

  


Table 1 – Results of 2-way ANOVA between Baseline and 4 week follow-up

 

 

Group

 

 

LspLsta

N=26

GspLstb

N=30

LspGstc

N=24

GspGstd

N=23

Variable

Time

M±SD (d score)

M±SD (d score)

M±SD (d score)

M±SD (d score)

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Right Grasp (kg)

Base

22.8 ±12.5

25.2 ±11.1

24.0 ±11.3

24.9 ±12.7

 

4 wk

25.8 ±13.2 (0.24)

27.6 ±10.6 (0.22)

27.6 ±12.5 (0.32)

28.2 ±12.9 (0.26)

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Right Palmar Pinch (kg)

Base

6.0 ±2.4

7.3 ±1.4

6.5 ±2.5

6.8 ±2.5

 

4 wk

6.5 ±2.4 (0.21)

7.4 ±1.7 (0.07)

6.7±2.5 (0.08)

7.5 ±2.3 (0.28)

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Right Lateral Pinch (kg)

Base

7.3 ±2.3

8.4 ±2.0

7.0 ±2.2

7.8 ±2.5

 

4 wk

7.5 ±2.5 (0.09)

8.5 ±2.1 (0.05)

7.3 ±2.2 (0.14)

8.6 ±2.1† (0.32)

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Purdue Right (n)

Base

11.6 ±3.1

12.3 ±2.1

11.6 ±2.5

12.5 ±2.1

 

4 wk

12.6 ±3.2 (0.32)

13.5 ±2.9 (0.57)

12.3 ±2.8 (0.28)

13.2 ±1.9 (0.33)

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Purdue Left (n)

Base

11.3 ±2.5

12.2 ±2.6

12.0 ±2.9

12.3 ±1.8

 

4 wk

12.5 ±2.5† (0.48)

12.6 ±2.5 (0.15)

12.0 ±3.3 (0)

13.3 ±2.0 (0.56)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purdue Both (n)

Base

18.5 ±5.4

19.5 ±4.4

18.2 ±5.2

20.3 ±3.4

 

4 wk

19.5 ±5.4 (0.19)

19.9 ±4.6 (0.09)

19.0 ±5.1 (0.15)

19.7 ±2.8 (-0.18)

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Purdue Assembly (n)

Base

25.6 ±8.3

28.3 ±8.5

25.2 ±9.2

29.8 ±7.3

 

4 wk

29.9 ±8.9 (0.52)

28.8 ±7.2 (0.06)

26.8 ±9.7 (0.17)

31.5 ±8.7 (0.23)

a(lumbrical splint, lumbrical stretch); b(general splint, lumbrical stretch; c(lumbrical splint, general stretch); d(General splint, general stretch)
* effect of time significant; †effect of groupxtime significant

 


Disclosure:

N. A. Baker,
None;

K. Moehling,
None;

E. Rubinstein,
None;

N. Gustafson,
None;

M. Baratz,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/lumbrical-splinting-and-stretching-versus-standard-treatment-on-grip-pinch-and-dexterity-in-people-with-carpal-tunnel-syndrome/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology