The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A study to compare the wrist movement available in two commercial wrist orthotics

A study to compare the wrist movement available in two commercial wrist orthotics
A study to compare the wrist movement available in two commercial wrist orthotics
This study compared the degree of wrist movement available in two commercial wrist orthoses of the same design but constructed of different fabrics. Twenty participants with normal wrist movement had their right dominant wrist range of flexion and extension measured using an isokinetic dynamometer. The results showed that neither orthosis immobilised the wrist. The mean total range of movement in the neoprene orthosis (73.55) was significantly greater (p<0.001) than that in the elastic orthosis (53.30). The elastic orthosis provided a greater degree of restriction of movement and more consistent control than the neoprene orthosis. Neither orthosis should be used where immobilisation is the treatment aim.
0308-0226
461 - 465
Sawyer, Tracey
b730ffb5-1eec-4b95-942e-ba62e7d07a40
Ellis, Bridget
0941a6f4-b192-4c71-a69f-4fa2d4267e91
Sawyer, Tracey
b730ffb5-1eec-4b95-942e-ba62e7d07a40
Ellis, Bridget
0941a6f4-b192-4c71-a69f-4fa2d4267e91

Sawyer, Tracey and Ellis, Bridget (2004) A study to compare the wrist movement available in two commercial wrist orthotics. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67 (10), 461 - 465.

Record type: Article

Abstract

This study compared the degree of wrist movement available in two commercial wrist orthoses of the same design but constructed of different fabrics. Twenty participants with normal wrist movement had their right dominant wrist range of flexion and extension measured using an isokinetic dynamometer. The results showed that neither orthosis immobilised the wrist. The mean total range of movement in the neoprene orthosis (73.55) was significantly greater (p<0.001) than that in the elastic orthosis (53.30). The elastic orthosis provided a greater degree of restriction of movement and more consistent control than the neoprene orthosis. Neither orthosis should be used where immobilisation is the treatment aim.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2004

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 17893
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/17893
ISSN: 0308-0226
PURE UUID: d3cf774d-46e5-4ab1-9f50-6e65884aa0fc

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Nov 2005
Last modified: 08 Jan 2022 18:49

Export record

Contributors

Author: Tracey Sawyer
Author: Bridget Ellis

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×