MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1616366854 · doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2015.06.006

The Effectiveness of Passive Physical Modalities for the Management of Soft Tissue Injuries and Neuropathies of the Wrist and Hand: A Systematic Review by the Ontario Protocol for Traffic Injury Management (OPTIMa) Collaboration

2015· review· en· W1616366854 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kevin D’Angelo, Deborah Sutton, Pierre Côté, Sarah Dion, Jessica J. Wong, Hainan Yu, Kristi Randhawa, Danielle Southerst, Sharanya Varatharajan, Jocelyn Cox, Courtney Brown, Roger Menta, Margareta Nordin, Heather M. Shearer, Arthur Ameis, Maja Stupar, Linda Carroll, Anne Taylor‐Vaisey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalCentre for Disability Prevention and RehabilitationUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalOntario Tech UniversityCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePsycINFOPhysical therapyMEDLINECINAHLRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionEvidence-based medicineSplintsCarpal tunnel syndromePhysical medicine and rehabilitationModalitiesSurgeryAlternative medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of passive physical modalities compared to other interventions, placebo/sham interventions, or no intervention in improving self-rated recovery, functional recovery, clinical outcomes and/or administrative outcomes (eg, time of disability benefits) in adults and/or children with soft tissue injuries and neuropathies of the wrist and hand. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, accessed through Ovid Technologies, Inc, and CINAHL Plus with Full Text, accessed through EBSCO host, from 1990 to 2015. Our search strategies combined controlled vocabulary relevant to each database (eg, MeSH for MEDLINE) and text words relevant to our research question and the inclusion criteria. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies were eligible. Random pairs of independent reviewers screened studies for relevance and critically appraised relevant studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Studies with low risk of bias were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. RESULTS: We screened 6618 articles and critically appraised 11 studies. Of those, 7 had low risk of bias: 5 addressed carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and 2 addressed de Quervain disease. We found evidence that various types of night splints lead to similar outcomes for the management of CTS. The evidence suggests that a night wrist splint is less effective than surgery in the short term but not in the long term. Furthermore, a night wrist splint and needle electroacupuncture lead to similar outcomes immediately postintervention. Finally, low-level laser therapy and placebo low-level laser therapy lead to similar outcomes. The evidence suggests that kinesio tape or a thumb spica cast offers short-term benefit for the management of de Quervain disease. Our search did not identify any low risk of bias studies examining the effectiveness of passive physical modalities for the management of other soft tissue injuries or neuropathies of the wrist and hand. CONCLUSIONS: Different night orthoses provided similar outcomes for CTS. Night orthoses offer similar outcomes to electroacupuncture but are less effective than surgery in the short term. This review suggests that kinesio tape or a thumb spica cast may offer short-term benefit for the management of de Quervain disease.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.014
Bibliometrics0.0190.017
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.176
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Manipulative and Physiological TherapeuticsSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207