Journal of Hand Therapy最新文献

Background: Pectoralis minor length was associated with shoulder pain and functional limitations. Although various clinical tests assess pectoralis minor length in individuals with and without shoulder pain, their psychometrics properties have not been systematically explored.

Purpose: To provide a comprehensive overview of the measurement properties of tests used to assess pectoralis minor length in individuals with and without rotator cuff-related shoulder pain.

Study design: Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Methods: Four electronic databases were searched until February 2025. Studies assessing any pectoralis minor length tests measurement property in adults with and without rotator cuff-related shoulder pain were included. Two reviewers independently screened all studies and assessed the risk of bias using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Subsequently, each measurement property of each pectoralis minor length test was classified as sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent based on the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties. A random-effects model was used in the meta-analysis.

Results: Three tests evaluating pectoralis minor length were identified from the 10 included studies. Although no test showed sufficient evidence for all measurement properties, the pectoralis minor length (origin-insertion distance) assessed in standing had the most properties evaluated. The test demonstrated the best measurement properties in individuals with and without shoulder pain, although measurement error and responsiveness still need to be determined. The pooled results indicated very good intra- (156 individuals without pain; ICC = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.89-0.95) and inter-rater (260 individuals without pain; ICC = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.66-0.95; 338 individuals with and without shoulder pain; ICC = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.75-0.95) reliability.

Conclusions: There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend any test for estimating pectoralis minor length. Thus, more research is needed, particularly regarding measurement error and responsiveness. Available tests should be used with caution in research and clinical practice.

Background: Distal radius fractures are among the most common upper limb injuries, significantly impacting hand function and quality of life of individuals. Rehabilitation is essential for optimizing functional recovery, yet the research landscape on distal radius fractures rehabilitation is fragmented across various methodologies and interventions.

Purpose: This study aims to integrate bibliometric analysis and a scoping review to map the existing literature, identify research trends, and evaluate rehabilitation approaches for distal radius fractures.

Study design: Systematic bibliometric scoping review.

Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Scopus database to examine publication trends, citation impact, and keyword co-occurrence in distal radius fractures rehabilitation research. The scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework, identifying relevant studies focusing on rehabilitation interventions for distal radius fractures. Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials assessing rehabilitation strategies. Data were extracted and analyzed to determine key intervention categories, outcome measures, and research gaps.

Results: The bibliometric analysis identified 964 publications on distal radius fractures rehabilitation, with an increasing trend in research output since the 1990s. The United States, Canada, and Germany were the leading contributors, with North American institutions demonstrating high citation impact. Key research themes included rehabilitation techniques, surgical management, and functional outcomes. The scoping review included 11 randomized controlled trials, categorizing rehabilitation approaches into multimodal rehabilitation, technology-assisted rehabilitation, early vs delayed mobilization, exercise-based rehabilitation, and physical therapy and manual therapy approaches. Early mobilization and structured therapy demonstrated positive functional outcomes, while digital interventions showed potential but lacked long-term validation. Most studies used the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand as outcome measures.

Conclusions: The integration of bibliometric and scoping review findings highlights a growing research focus on distal radius fractures rehabilitation, yet significant gaps remain in standardized rehabilitation protocols and long-term outcome evaluations.