Effectiveness of Conservative Interventions in the Treatment of Trigger Finger
Trial statusRecruiting
Trial phaseNot applicable
Trial typeInterventional
Biological sexAll
Age18-65
SponsorHacettepe University
About this trial
There is no study in the literature comparing the effectiveness of ESWT and splint therapy, which are the most commonly used approaches in the treatment of Trigger Finger (TF). The aim in this study is to investigate the effectiveness of ESWT and splint therapy used in the treatment of TF.
Eligibility criteria
This trial does not accept healthy volunteersQualifiers
Volunteering
Being between the ages of 18-65
Being diagnosed with stage 1 or stage 2 (according to the Froimson classification) trigger finger
Having the language and cognitive skills to answer the questionnaires used in the evaluation
Disqualifiers
Being pregnant
Having an inflammatory disorder
Having had surgery on the hand/wrist
Having a neurological disease
Trial design
Design model
Parallel
Treatments tested in this trial
Experimental: Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy
Other interventionExtracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT for short) application will be performed on A1 pulley at 15 Hz, 1000 shock wave impulses, and 2.0 bar level, for a total of 5 sessions, one week apart.
Trigger Finger Splint
Other interventionA trigger finger splint that immobilizes the MCF joint will be recommended for the splint treatment group. The patient will be asked to use this splint throughout the day for 8 weeks.
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy+ Trigger Finger Splint
Other interventionExtracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT for short) application will be performed on A1 pulley at 15 Hz, 1000 shock wave impulses, and 2.0 bar level, for a total of 5 sessions, one week apart. Also, A trigger finger splint that immobilizes the MCF joint will be recommended.
Treatment groups
54 Participants
are divided into 3 treatment groupsGroup A: Extracorporeal Shock Wave TherapyExperimental treatment 1 intervention
Group B: Trigger Finger SplintExperimental treatment 1 intervention
Group C: Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy+Trigger Finger SplintExperimental treatment 1 intervention
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
1
Visual analog scale
The severity of pain felt by individuals at rest and during challenging activities will be evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The VAS consists of a 10cm line, with two end points representing 0 ('no pain') and 10 ('pain as bad as it could possibly be').
Time frame
pre-treatment and post-treatment at 8 weekSecondary outcomes
1
Grip and pinch strength
Grip Strength Measurement: Standard, tip, lateral and tripod grip strengths will be performed in the test position standardized by the American Association of Hand Therapists. Jamar hand dynamometer and pinchmeter (Pro Med Products, Atlanta, GA, USA) will be used for evaluation. Grip strength will be measured at the 2nd position of the dynamometer. The evaluation will be made three times for each measurement and the average will be recorded in kg.
Time frame
pre-treatment and post-treatment at 8 weeks2
Number of trigger
Patients will be asked to open and close their hand ten times and the number of triggers will be recorded out of 10. If the patient's finger becomes locked at any time while making a full fist, they will be asked to stop and a score of 10/10 will be given.
Time frame
pre-treatment and post-treatment at 8 weeks3
Functional assessment
The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire: DASH contains thirty items regarding symptoms and activities of daily living. The total score is 100, with higher scores indicating more apology.
Time frame
pre-treatment and post-treatment at 8 weeks4
Treatment satisfaction
Roles and Maudsley Score is used to score treatment satisfaction level. The patient is asked to compare his/her pain level before and after treatment and to indicate whether he or she has benefited. 1. Excellent: I have no pain, I can do my movements and activities fully, I benefited from the treatment. 2. Good: I have some discomfort, but I can do my movements and activities fully, my complaints have decreased after the treatment. 3. Acceptable: My pain level has decreased compared to before the treatment, but I feel discomfort after long-term activities. I received little benefit from the treatment. 4. Bad: I cannot do activities due to my pain, I did not benefit from the treatment.
Time frame
pre-treatment and post-treatment at 8 weeksSponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
Source ClinicalTrials.gov