Objective: To compare the short-term utility and clinical effectiveness of the commercial-made Futuro wrist orthosis with a newly developed, custom-made ThermoLyn wrist orthosis.
Methods: Using a randomized cross-over trial, 10 patients with rheumatoid arthritis used each of the two orthoses for two weeks. Outcome measures were patients' judgments with respect to different statements about utility and clinical assessments including pain and swelling of the wrist and finger joints, range of motion of the wrist, and grip strength. At the end of the study the patients were asked which of the two orthoses they preferred and why.
Results: Patients tended to favor the Futuro wrist orthosis with respect to pain relief and to handling the orthosis. The visual analog scale score of the appearance of the ThermoLyn wrist orthosis was a little higher than that of the Futuro wrist orthosis, but the difference was not statistically significant. Clinical parameters such as pain in the wrist, swelling of the wrist and finger joints, and movements of the wrist showed that the Futuro orthosis tended to be more effective than the ThermoLyn orthosis. None of the differences reached statistical significance. At the end of the study, 5 patients preferred the Futuro and 5 patients the ThermoLyn wrist orthosis. Arguments in favor of the ThermoLyn orthosis were better hygiene, stability, and no need to remove the orthosis during dirty and wet conditions. Arguments in favor of the Futuro orthosis were greater suppleness and freedom of movement.
Conclusions: The ready-made fabric Futuro wrist orthosis appears to be as good as the more expensive individually made synthetic ThermoLyn wrist orthosis with respect to short-term utility and clinical effectiveness. The conditions under which the orthosis will be worn will help to decide which orthosis is the best for the patient. In the event that the patient wants to use the orthosis in wet and dirty conditions, the ThermoLyn wrist orthosis is a good alternative to the Futuro wrist orthosis.