Conservative management of trigger finger: A systematic review

Relative motion splints versus metacarpophalangeal joint blocking splints in the management of trigger finger: Study protocol for a randomized comparative trial

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports the use of hand-based metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) blocking splints as an intervention for trigger finger (TF). In practice, finger-based relative motion (RM) splints are also implemented without evidence.

PURPOSE

This randomized comparative trial (RCT) aims to evaluate implementation of MCPJ blocking and RM splints for effectiveness, function, occupational performance and wearability after 6 weeks of TF management.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Priori analysis determined 36 individuals were needed for random assignment to the RM or MCPJ blocking splint groups. Individuals must be aged ≥21 years, and diagnosed with TF involving ≥1 finger. For blinding purposes, the primary author screens for eligibility, fabricates the splints and educates. Therapist A administers the primary outcome measures Week-1 and Week-6-stage of stenosing tenosynovitis and secondary outcome measures- number of triggering events in 10 active fists, visual analog scales (VAS) for pain, splint comfort and satisfaction, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Therapist B in Week-3 instructs participants in deep tissue massage and administers splint wearability VASs. The RM pencil test is used to determine the affected finger(s) MCPJ splint position i.e., more extension or flexion based on participant response. The MCPJ blocking splint holds the MCPJ in a neutral position. Analysis involves a mixed-effects ANOVA to compare Week-1 and Week-6 primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Recruitment and data collection are ongoing.

DISCUSSION

Biomechanically RM splints control tendon excursion and reduce passive tendon tension while allowing unencumbered finger motion and hand function. Hence clinicians use RM splints as an intervention for TF, despite the lack of implementation evidence. This RCT implements a function-focused as well as patient-centered approach with partial blinding of assessors and participants.

CONCLUSION

We anticipate that this study will provide evidence for the implementation of RM splints to manage adults with TF.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05763017).

The anisotropic and region-dependent mechanical response of wrap-around tendons under tensile, compressive and combined multiaxial loads

The present work reports on the multiaxial region and orientation-dependent mechanical properties of two porcine wrap-around tendons under tensile, compressive and combined loads based on an extensive study with n=175 samples. The results provide a detailed dataset of the anisotropic tensile and compressive longitudinal properties and document a pronounced tension-compression asymmetry. Motivated by the physiological loading conditions of these tendons, which include transversal compression at bony abutments in addition to longitudinal tension, we systematically investigated the change in axial tension when the tendon is compressed transversally along one or both perpendicular directions. The results reveal that the transversal compression can increase axial tension (proximal-distal direction) in both cases to orders of 30%, yet by a larger amount in the first case (transversal compression in anterior-posterior direction), which seems to be more relevant for wrap-around tendons in-vivo. These quantitative measurements are in line with earlier findings on auxetic properties of tendon tissue, but show for the first time the influence of this property on the stress response of the tendon, and may thus reveal an important functional principle within these essential elements of force transmission in the body. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: The work reports for the first time on multiaxial region and orientation-dependent mechanical properties of wrap-around tendons under various loads. The results indicate that differences in the mechanical properties exist between zones that are predominantly in a uniaxial tensile state and those that experience complex load states. The observed counterintuitive increase of the axial tension upon lateral compression points at auxetic properties of the tendon tissue which may be pivotal for the function of the tendon as an element of the musculoskeletal system. It suggests that the tendon's performance in transmitting forces is not diminished but enhanced when the action line is deflected by a bony pulley around which the tendon wraps, representing an important functional principle of tendon tissue.

The Outcomes of 2,154 Endoscopic Trigger Finger Releases

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is one of the most frequent causes of hand pain and disability. Recently, an endoscopic trigger finger release technique was developed, but outcomes have rarely been reported. Here, we present the outcomes of 2154 endoscopic trigger finger release procedures in a single center.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 2154 endoscopic trigger finger release procedures were performed on 2034 patients. Outcome assessment at 90 days after surgery was classified as excellent, good, fair or poor according to a combination of patient satisfaction with the scar and pain at rest or under load on a numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

The therapeutic outcomes were: 1027 excellent, 607 good, 400 fair, and none poor. No major surgical complications were observed. Minor complications occurred in 231 fingers (10.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

All patients were satisfied with their outcome after endoscopic trigger finger release. Endoscopic release can be an effective and efficient therapeutic method for the treatment of trigger finger.

A Comparison of Patient Characteristics and Outcomes Between Patients Receiving Flexor Digitorum Superficialis Slip Excision or Isolated A1 Pulley Release for Trigger Finger

PURPOSE

Resection of the radial or ulnar slip of the flexor digitorum superficialis (FDS) tendon is a known treatment option for persistent trigger finger. Risk factors for undergoing FDS slip excision are unclear. We hypothesized that patients who underwent A1 pulley release with FDS slip excision secondary to persistent triggering would have a higher comorbidity burden compared to those receiving A1 pulley release alone.

METHODS

We identified all adult patients who underwent A1 pulley release with FDS slip excision because of persistent triggering either intraoperatively or postoperatively from 2018 to 2023. We selected a 3:1 age- and sex-matched control group who underwent isolated A1 pulley release. Charts were retrospectively reviewed for demographics, selected comorbidities, trigger finger history, and postoperative course. We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the probability of FDS slip excision after adjusting for several variables that were significant in bivariate comparisons.

RESULTS

We identified 48 patients who underwent A1 pulley release with FDS slip excision and 144 controls. Our multivariable model showed that patients with additional trigger fingers and a preoperative proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint contracture were significantly more likely to undergo FDS slip excision.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent A1 pulley release with FDS slip excision were significantly more likely to have multiple trigger fingers or a preoperative PIP joint contracture. Clinicians should counsel patients with these risk factors regarding the potential for FDS slip excision in addition to A1 pulley release to alleviate triggering of the affected digit.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic III.

Treatment of trigger finger with metacarpophalangeal joint blocking orthosis vs relative motion extension orthosis: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The metacarpophalangeal joint blocking orthosis (MCPJ-BO) is one of the first-line orthotic treatment for patients with trigger finger (TF). Relative motion extension orthosis (RME-O) has recently emerged as a treatment option for various hand disorders involving TF.

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of 6 weeks of orthotic treatment with the MCPJ-BO and the RME-O for pain relief. Function and satisfaction with the orthosis were assessed as secondary objectives.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized clinical study.

METHODS

Thirty patients with an average age of 50 years with Froimson stage 1-3 A1 pulley triggering participated in the study. They were randomly assigned to either the MCPJ-BO (n = 15; 10 females, five males) or the RME-O group (n = 15; 12 females, three males). The orthoses were worn full time for 6 weeks. All patients received patient education, activity modification, and flexor tendon gliding exercises as part of the rehabilitation program. Pre- and post-assessments included Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, and Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology questionnaire. The Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to analyze the difference between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in pain and function before treatment (p < 0.05). Within-group comparisons indicated that both orthoses relieved pain, but the MCPJ-BO group achieved greater pain relief (p = 0.001). There was a significant improvement in function in the MCPJ-BO group, with a mean change of 12.7 (p = 0.0001). The overall success rates for the MCPJ-BO group and RME-O group were 60% and 27%, respectively. Patients in both groups had high satisfaction with the orthosis.

CONCLUSIONS

MCPJ-BO and RME-O could be used for pain relief in the treatment of TF. The MCPJ-BO appears to be more effective than the RME-O in improving function.

Identification of the length and location of the A1 pulley combining palpation technique with palm landmarks: a cadaveric study

Through anatomical morphology, to accumulate the relevant parameters of the A1 pulley of each adult finger. A total of 100 fingers were selected, dissected layer by layer, and the A1 pulley and neurovascular of each finger were observed. Measure the length of the A1 pulley, the distance between the needle knife insertion point and the proximal edge of A1 pulley, and the nerves and blood vessels on both sides. (1) The length of A1 pulleys of each finger is 6.18 ± 0.33 mm, 6.58 ± 0.73 mm, 5.98 ± 0.67 mm, 5.36 ± 1.08 mm, 5.63 ± 1.09 mm. (2) The distances between the needle knife entry point of each finger and the volar proper nerve of the ulnar finger are 7.00 ± 1.55 mm, 8.29 ± 1.46 mm, 5.10 ± 0.25 mm, 5.30 ± 0.24 mm, 0 mm; the distances from the volar proper nerve of the radial finger are 9.08 ± 0.87 mm, 4.70 ± 1.10 mm, 7.03 ± 0.72 mm, 6.81 ± 0.22 mm, 7.81 ± 0.57 mm. (3) The distances between the needle knife entry point of each finger and the proper volar artery of the ulnar finger are 10.40 ± 0.75 mm, 8.89 ± 0.53 mm, 6.35 ± 0.44 mm, 7.26 ± 0.16 mm, 0 mm, respectively; The distances from the volar proper artery of the radial finger are 8.75 ± 1.07 mm, 6.10 ± 0.35 mm, 11.44 ± 0.41 mm, 8.19 ± 0.60 mm, 9.78 ± 0.68 mm, respectively. The landmarks of the needle entry points are located at the position corresponding to the highest point of the metacarpal heads, except the tail finger. From the needle knife entry point to distal, cut the proximal edge of the A1 pulley longitudinally along the midline until the patient can flex autonomously, and pay attention to the distance between the two sides of 3.60-11.85 mm neurovascular bundle.

Are There Differences in Pain Reduction and Functional Improvement Among Splint Alone, Steroid Alone, and Combination for the Treatment of Adults With Trigger Finger?

BACKGROUND

Steroid injection and splinting, which are commonly recommended nonsurgical treatments in adults with trigger finger, have been demonstrated to effectively relieve pain and improve function. However, to our knowledge, there have been no direct comparisons of pain relief and function improvement with splinting alone, steroid injection alone, or a combination of splinting and steroid injection in patients with this diagnosis.

QUESTION/PURPOSE

Are there differences in pain reduction and functional improvement in adults with trigger finger treated with splinting alone, steroid injection alone, and a combination of splinting and steroid injection at 6, 12, and 52 weeks after the intervention?

METHODS

Between May 2021 and December 2021, we treated 165 adult patients for trigger finger at an academic university hospital. Based on prespecified criteria, all patients we saw during that period were eligible, but 27% (45 of 165) were excluded because they had received a previous local corticosteroid injection (n = 10) or they had concomitant carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 14), first carpometacarpal joint arthritis (n = 3), osteoarthritis of the hand (n = 6), de Quervain disease (n = 3), multiple-digit trigger finger (n = 6), or pregnancy during the study period (n = 3). After screening, 120 patients were randomized to receive either splinting (n = 43), steroid injection (n = 40), or splinting plus steroid injection (n = 37). Patients were randomly assigned to the different treatments using computer-generated block randomization (block of six). Sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes were used in the allocation concealment process. Both the allocator and the outcome assessor were blinded. Splinting involved the patient wearing a fixed metacarpophalangeal joint orthosis in the neutral position at least 8 hours per day for 6 consecutive weeks. Steroid injection was performed using 1 mL of 1% lidocaine without epinephrine and 1 mL of triamcinolone acetonide (10 mg/mL) injected directly into the flexor tendon sheath. No patients were lost to follow-up or had treatment failure (that is, the patient had persistent pain or triggering with the trigger finger treatment and requested additional medical management including additional splinting, steroid injection, or surgery) at 6 or 12 weeks after the intervention, and at 52 weeks, there was no difference in loss to follow-up among the treatment groups. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed with all 120 patients, and a per-protocol analysis was conducted with 86 patients after excluding patients who were lost to follow-up or had treatment failure. Primary outcomes evaluated were VAS pain reduction and improvement in Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) scores at 6, 12, and 52 weeks after the intervention. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) values were 1 and 10.9 for the VAS and MHQ, respectively.

RESULTS

There were no clinically important differences in VAS pain scores among the three treatment groups at any timepoint, in either the intention-to-treat or the per-protocol analyses. Likewise, there were no clinically important differences in MHQ scores at any timepoint in either the intention-to-treat or the per-protocol analyses.

CONCLUSION

Splinting alone is recommended as the initial treatment for adults with trigger finger because there were no clinically important differences between splinting alone and steroid injection alone in terms of pain reduction and symptom or functional improvement up to 1 year. The combination of steroid injection and splinting is disadvantageous because the benefits in terms of pain reduction and symptom or functional improvement are not different from those achieved with steroid injection or splinting alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Orthosis vs. exercise for the treatment of adult idiopathic trigger fingers: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Trigger finger is a common clinical disorder that often results in pain and functional limitations. This study aimed to determine whether joint-blocking orthosis was effective in treating adult idiopathic trigger fingers.

METHODS

Fifty-five participants were randomly assigned to either a hand therapy group or an orthosis group that immobilized the proximal interphalangeal joint for 6 weeks. The Green classification of triggering; short-form version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand; and numeric pain rating scale were used to assess participants' data.

RESULTS

The orthosis was "successful" in completely resolving the symptoms of trigger finger in 53.6% of the participants at 6 weeks postintervention, whereas the hand therapy control group did not result in any "successful" outcomes. The Green classification score for the orthosis group decreased from 2.68 (standard deviation = 0.47) at baseline to 0.93 (standard deviation = 1.12) at 6 weeks. The short-form version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand disability score was significantly reduced after wearing the orthosis, F (2, 52) = 74.16 p < 0.001, and improved from baseline (M = 37.6) to 6 weeks (M = 20.26). The pain intensity score was also significantly decreased after wearing the orthosis, F (2, 52) = 52.17 p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.67.

CONCLUSION

Using orthosis to immobilize the proximal interphalangeal joint, day and night, for 6 weeks, is an effective and reasonable option for treating idiopathic trigger fingers with Green grade 2 or 3. Hand therapy without orthosis did not result in significant improvements.

Triggering, clicking, locking and crepitus of the finger: A comprehensive overview

Triggering, locking, clicking, and crepitus of the fingers are common symptoms patients present with. Even though crepitus and triggering can occur as part of the same underlying diagnosis, it is important to differentiate between them, as they usually indicate different possible diagnoses. The differential diagnoses that should be considered include trigger finger, metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) arthritis, fractures or dislocations, extensor digitorum communis subluxation or dislocation, locked MCPJ, avascular necrosis of the metacarpal head, and Dupuytren's disease. A thorough clinical examination with appropriate special investigations can permit the clinician to make the correct diagnosis. Appropriate management of a confirmed diagnosis is successful in providing symptomatic improvement.

Minimal clinically important difference of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score and the pain visual analogue scale in conservative treatment of trigger finger

We investigated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) and the pain visual analogue scale (VAS-pain) after conservative treatment of trigger finger. This secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial compared pain reduction, symptoms and functional improvement at 12 weeks. Patients included were at least 18 years old and able to complete MHQ and VAS-pain at enrolment and 12 weeks after treatment. The MCIDs of MHQ and VAS-pain were evaluated using a distribution-based, anchor-based and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve-based approach. Of the 117 patients, the MCIDs of MHQ and VAS-pain using a distribution-based approach were 5.3 and 0.6, respectively; applying ROC method were 23.5 and 2.5, respectively; and using anchor questions were 15 and 2, respectively. These MCID values by anchor-based method with a minimal difference of 15 for MHQ and 2 for VAS-pain are recommended as primary evidence to determine clinically significant improvement after conservative treatment of trigger finger.Level of evidence: I.

[Trigger finger-pitfalls and differential diagnosis]

The differential diagnosis of a trigger finger presents a clinical challenge. This case depicts a 32-year-old male patient who presented with persistent snapping of the right index finger at the metacarpophalangeal joint without localized tenderness despite previous surgical A1-annular ligament release. CT diagnostics demonstrated a prominent articular tuberosity. The MRI showed no pathological findings. Surgical revision with concomitant excision of the tuberosity restored smooth mobility of the index finger.

Systematic YouTube Review - Trigger Finger Release

Background: With lack of regulation and incentivisation on YouTube for high-quality healthcare information, it is important to objectively evaluate the quality of information on trigger finger - a common condition for hand surgeon referral. Methods: YouTube was queried (11/21/2021) for videos on trigger finger release surgery. Videos were excluded if they were about unrelated topics or not in English. The most viewed 59 videos were categorised by source as physician or non-physician. Two independent reviewers quantified the reliability, quality and content of each video, with inter-rater reliability assessed using Kohen's Kappa test. Reliability was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) score. Quality was assessed using the DISCERN score with high-quality videos defined as those with scores in the sample upper 25th percentile. Content was assessed using the informational content score (ICS) with scores in the sample upper 25th percentile indicating more complete information. Two-sample t-tests and logistic regression were used to assess variations between sources. Results: Videos by physicians had higher DISCERN quality (42.6 ± 7.9, 36.4 ± 10.3; p = 0.02) and informational content (5.8 ± 2.6, 4.0 ± 1.7; p = 0.01) scores compared to those by non-physician sources. Videos by physicians were associated with increased odds of high-quality (Odds Ratio [OR] 5.7, 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI] 1.3-41.3) and provided more complete patient information (OR 6.3, 95% CI 1.4-48.9). The lowest DISCERN sub-scores for all videos were discussion of the uncertainties and risks associated with surgery. The lowest ICS for all videos were in the diagnosis of trigger finger (11.9%) and non-surgical prognosis (15.3%). Conclusions: Physician videos have more complete and higher quality information on trigger finger release. Additionally, discussion of treatment risks, areas of uncertainty, the diagnostic process, non-surgical prognosis and transparency on references used were identified as lacking content. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).

Orthotic intervention options to non-surgically manage adult and pediatric trigger finger: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The design and efficacy of orthotic intervention to non-surgically manage adult and pediatric trigger finger vary widely.

PURPOSE

To identify types of orthoses (including relative motion), effectiveness, and outcome measurements used to non-surgically manage adult and pediatric trigger finger.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

The study was undertaken according to The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 Statement and registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews Registry, number CRD42022322515. Two independent authors electronically and manually searched, and screened 4 databases; selected articles following pre-set eligibility criteria; assessed the quality of the evidence using the Structured Effectiveness for Quality Evaluation of Study; and extracted the data.

RESULTS

Of the 11 articles included, 2 involved pediatric trigger finger and 9 adult trigger finger. Orthoses for pediatric trigger finger positioned finger(s), hand, and/or wrist of children in neutral extension. In adults, a single joint was immobilized by the orthosis, blocking either the metacarpophalangeal joint or the proximal or distal interphalangeal joint. All studies reported positive results with statistically significant improvements and medium to large effect size to almost every outcome measure, including the Number of Triggering Events in Ten Active Fist 1.37, Frequency of Triggering from 2.07 to 2.54, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Outcome Measure from 0.46 to 1.88, Visual Analogue Pain Scale from 0.92 to 2.00, and Numeric Rating Pain Scale from 0.49 to 1.31. Severity tools and patient-rated outcome measures were used with the validity and reliability of some unknown.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthoses are effective for non-surgical management of pediatric and adult trigger finger using various orthotic options. Although used in practice, evidence for the use of relative motion orthosis is absent. High-quality studies based on sound research questions and design using reliable and valid outcome measures are needed.

Prediction of disability in trigger finger: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study

The aim of this prospective study of 55 patients was to analyse the cross-sectional and longitudinal relationship between disability and physical and psychological variables after conservative treatment of trigger finger and to determine the predictive factors for the post-treatment disability score and change in disability score. The primary outcome measure was the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. Potential predictive factors included pain, number of triggering events, depression, anxiety and kinesiophobia. Disability correlated strongly with anxiety, moderately with pain and depression and weakly with triggering and kinesiophobia. The change in depression score correlated significantly with the change in disability score. Post-treatment pain and anxiety scores accounted for 47% of the explained variance in disability score. Improvement in depression after treatment accounted for 18% of the explained variance in disability change score. Psychological variables appear to be potential predictors of disability.Level of evidence: IV.

Trigger Finger Due to Anomaly of Lumbrical Insertion: A Case Report and Review of Literature

CASE

Trigger finger (TF), or stenosing synovitis, is a common condition that can usually be diagnosed by physical examination. We recently operated on a patient with TF who did not respond to conservative treatment. At surgery, we found an anomalous insertion of the fourth lumbrical muscle to the A1 pulley. This insertion was observed to cause mechanical narrowing of the pulley due to a pulling effect by the muscle, which was relieved by resection.

CONCLUSION

Although rare, the operating surgeon should be aware that local anatomical anomalies, such as insertion of a lumbrical into the A1 pulley, can be a cause of trigger finger.

The effects of adding splint use to corticosteroid injection for the treatment of trigger finger: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is the most common flexor tendinopathy affecting the general population. We evaluated the effects of adding a static metacarpophalangeal joint splint to corticosteroid injection for the management of trigger finger in the short term.

METHODS

We carried out a randomized controlled trial with two parallel arms in Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at a university hospital. We randomly allocated 60 participants (34 women) with trigger fingers other than the thumb to two groups (both n = 30). The mean (SD) age was 41.5 (7.6) years. All participants received a single injection of 40 mg methylprednisolone plus 0.5 ml of lidocaine at the A1 pulley. Patients in the splint group wore a full time static splint for blocking the metacarpophalangeal joint for 3 months. The primary outcome was the Numerical Pain Rating Scale and the secondary outcomes were Boston questionnaire scores for symptom severity and functional status, grip strength, and the stages of stenosing tenosynovitis. We measured the outcomes at baseline, and in 1 and 3 months post-intervention.

RESULTS

Both interventions were effective; however, the splint group showed more reductions in pain (p = 0.013) and symptom severity (p = 0.047) and a larger decrease in the stages of tenosynovitis (p = 0.004) after 3 months. There was no significant difference in decreasing functional scores between the groups (p = 0.162). The splint group had a better (but not statistically significant) restoring grip strength (p = 0.056).

CONCLUSION

Wearing of a static metacarpophalangeal joint splint for 3 months following a single injection of corticosteroid increases and stabilises the benefits of the treatment for trigger finger.

Patient preference for trigger finger treatment

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is a common disorder of the hand that can cause disabling symptoms. Treatment options range from conservative management with observation and splinting, to surgical release, but there is currently not a consensus on a treatment algorithm.

AIM

To determine patient preference for the treatment of trigger finger using an online survey.

METHODS

An online crowdsourcing platform, Amazon Mechanical Turk, was used to recruit participants for this study. Participants were led through a scenario in which they were diagnosed with trigger finger. They were then asked to rank their preference of treatment options from the following: Observation, splinting, corticosteroid injection, surgery. The results of the surveys were then analyzed using R software.

RESULTS

Of 323 participants completed the survey. 7 participants were excluded because they failed to correctly answer the attention question, leaving 316 participants whose results were included. As a first choice for treatment 117 (37%) of the included participants chose observation, 86 (27%) chose splinting, 61 (19%) chose corticosteroid injection, and 52 (16%) chose surgery. The mean rank for observation was 2.26, for splinting was 2.30, for corticosteroid injection was 2.53, and for surgery was 2.91. The ranking of each treatment option was statistically different (P value < 0.05) from the others except for observation and splinting.

CONCLUSION

The practice of shared decision making with patients is imperative to providing the best care possible. The results from this study, especially the preference for less invasive treatment, may help providers better frame discussion around treatment options of trigger fingers. This in turn, may increase patient satisfaction in the treatment of trigger finger.

Complications and Functional Outcomes following Trigger Finger Release: A Cohort Study of 1879 Patients

BACKGROUND

Although trigger finger release is considered a safe procedure, large cohort studies reporting consistent complication rates and functional outcomes are scarce. Further insight into outcomes of this commonly performed procedure is essential for adequate treatment evaluation and patient counseling. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the complication rates and functional outcomes following trigger finger release.

METHODS

This is an observational multicenter cohort study of patients undergoing trigger finger release. The primary outcome included the occurrence of complications. The secondary outcome was change in hand function (Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire) from baseline to 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Complications were observed in 17.1 percent of 1879 patients. Most complications were minor, requiring hand therapy or analgesics (7.0 percent of all patients), antibiotics, or steroid injections (7.8 percent). However, 2.1 percent required surgical treatment and 0.2 percent developed complex regional pain syndrome. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire total score improved from baseline to 3 months postoperatively with 12.7 points, although the authors found considerable variation in outcomes with less improvement in patients with better baseline scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that trigger finger release results in improved hand function, although complications occur in 17 percent. Most complications are minor and can be treated with nonsurgical therapy, resulting in improved hand function as well. However, additional surgical treatment is required in 2 percent of patients. In addition, the authors found that change in hand function depends on the baseline score, with less improvement in patients with better baseline scores. Future studies should investigate factors that contribute to the variability in treatment outcomes following trigger finger release.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

High HbA1c Levels Are Associated With Development of Trigger Finger in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: An Observational Register-Based Study From Sweden

OBJECTIVE

Trigger finger (TF) is a hand disorder causing the fingers to painfully lock in flexion. Diabetes is a known risk factor; however, whether strict glycemic control effectively lowers risk of TF is unknown. Our aim was to examine whether high HbA1c was associated with increased risk of TF among individuals with diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) was cross-linked with the health care register of the Region of Skåne in southern Sweden. In total, 9,682 individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 85,755 individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) aged ≥18 years were included from 2004 to 2019. Associations between HbA1c and TF were calculated with sex-stratified, multivariate logistic regression models with 95% CIs, with adjustment for age, duration of diabetes, BMI, and systolic blood pressure.

RESULTS

In total, 486 women and 271 men with T1D and 1,143 women and 1,009 men with T2D were diagnosed with TF. Increased levels of HbA1c were associated with TF among individuals with T1D (women OR 1.26 [95% CI 1.1-1.4], P = 0.001, and men 1.4 [1.2-1.7], P < 0.001) and T2D (women 1.14 [95% CI 1.2-1.2], P < 0.001, and men 1.12 [95% CI 1.0-1.2], P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperglycemia increases the risk of developing TF among individuals with T1D and T2D. Optimal treatment of diabetes seems to be of importance for prevention of diabetic hand complications such as TF.

Trigger thumb preceding flexor pollicis longus tendon rupture after distal radius volar plate fixation: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Flexor pollicis longus (FPL) tendon rupture is a known complication after a distal radius (DR) fracture and subsequent fixation with a volar plate. A commonly accepted theory is the attrition of the flexor tendon by the prominent volar plate or theoretical injury to the tendon during the initial injury. An increasingly rare complication of distal radius open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with volar plate fixation is stenosing tenosynovitis, more commonly known as trigger finger.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

We present a case of FPL rupture 7 years after volar plate fixation for DR fracture with thumb triggering in an elderly patient. To treat her trigger thumb, a corticosteroid injection was administered for symptomatic relief. Without resolution of her symptoms, she was scheduled for hardware removal and A1 pulley release. At her preoperative visit, she was found to have a rupture of her FPL tendon.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This case report provides insight into an atypical presentation of delayed-onset FPL rupture and preceding trigger thumb. Especially in individuals with no inciting events, the patient's trigger thumb after volar plate distal radius ORIF may have been a warning sign for impending FPL rupture. This underscores the importance in considering potential tendon attrition as part of a differential diagnosis in a patient presenting with trigger thumb after distal radius ORIF with a volar plate. In assessing for FPL tendon rupture, diagnostic imaging modalities such as ultrasound may be utilized in evaluating this condition to prevent potential loss of function.

Current Concepts in the Management of Advanced Trigger Finger: A Critical Analysis Review

»

While the majority of patients with trigger finger obtain excellent outcomes from nonoperative treatment or release of the A1 pulley, a subset of patients with advanced trigger finger, defined as trigger finger with loss of active or passive range of motion, may have incomplete symptom relief and warrant specific attention.

»

Advanced trigger finger is more refractory to complete symptom resolution from corticosteroid injection, and particular attention should be paid to incomplete improvement of flexion contractures.

»

Unlike simple trigger finger, the pathology in advanced trigger finger involves not only the A1 pulley but also the flexor tendon, including thickening and degeneration.

»

Progression toward surgical intervention should not be delayed when nonoperative measures fail, and specific attention should be paid to persistent inability to achieve full extension following A1 pulley release.

»

Facing substantial residual flexion contracture, reduction flexor tenoplasty and partial or complete resection of the superficialis tendon followed by hand therapy and splinting may be needed to allow patients to regain reliable full range of motion.

A proximal interphalangeal joint custom-made orthosis in trigger finger: Functional outcome

Introduction

Trigger finger is a common and functionally limiting disorder. Finger immobilization using an orthotic device is one of the conservative treatment options for treating this condition. The most common orthosis previously described for trigger finger is metacarpophalangeal joint immobilization. There are limited studies describing the effectiveness of proximal interphalangeal joint orthosis for treatment of trigger finger.

Methods

This study was a single group pretest-posttest design. Adult patients with single digit idiopathic trigger finger were recruited and asked to wear a full-time orthoses for 6 weeks. The pre- and post-outcome measures included Quick-DASH score, the Stages of Stenosing Tenosynovitis (SST), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, the number of triggering events in ten active fists, and participant satisfaction with symptom improvement. Orthotic devices were made with thermoplastic material fabricated with adjustable Velcro tape at the dorsal side. All participants were given written handouts on this disease, orthotic care and gliding exercises. Paired t-tests were used to determine changes in outcome measures before and after wearing the orthosis.

Results

There were 30 participants included in this study. Evaluation after the use of PIP joint orthosis at 6 weeks revealed that there were statistically significant improvements in Quick-DASH score from enrolment (mean difference -29.0 (95%CI -34.5 to -23.4); p < 0.001), SST (mean difference -1.4 (95%CI -1.8 to -1.0); p < 0.001) and VAS (mean difference -3.4 (95%CI -4.3 to -2.5); p < 0.001). There were no serious adverse events and patient satisfaction with the treatment was high.

Conclusions

Despite our small study size, the use of proximal interphalangeal joint orthosis for 6 weeks resulted in statistically significant improvements in function, pain and triggering, and also high rates of acceptance in patients with isolated idiopathic trigger finger.

Multi-site evaluation of advanced practice hand therapy clinics for the management of patients with trigger digit

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort design.

BACKGROUND

Patient time on Australian public hospital surgical outpatient department (SOPD) waitlists often exceeds clinical recommendations for chronic hand conditions. Diversion to allied health is an alternative option, however evidence regarding patient and organizational outcomes in hand therapy is lacking.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To evaluate clinical and organizational efficacy, patient outcomes and satisfaction of diversion of referrals for patients with trigger digit (TD) from SOPD waitlists to Advanced Practice Hand Therapy (APHT) at 3 Australian hospitals.

METHODS

Data was collected from eligible patients with TD through chart reviews and telephone satisfaction surveys. Data included number of patients requiring SOPD review, repeat referral to SOPD in the 12 months following APHT discharge, patient-rated outcomes, satisfaction scores, wait times to SOPD review and conversion to surgery-rates. Mann Whitney-U, t-test, Pearson's chi-squared test and a Binary Logistic Regression analysis were performed.

RESULTS

104 patients completed APHT treatment. Seventy patients (67%) did not require return to the SOPD waitlist. Repeat referral to SOPD within 12 months of APHT discharge occurred for only 1 patient. Patients requiring SOPD review after APHT treatment were seen within target time frames and demonstrated 88% conversion to surgery-rates. Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire scores showed greater improvement in those not requiring SOPD review (P< .001~25.9 vs 4.2). Regression analysis identified a negative association between initial total Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire scores and unfavorable discharge outcomes (OR 0.96, P= .007). Most (81%-93%) patients indicated satisfaction with the APHT service.

CONCLUSION

Diversion of referrals for TD from SOPD to APHT is an effective waitlist management strategy, with the propensity to reduce waiting times, improve patient flow, whilst resulting in favorable clinical and patient-rated outcomes and satisfaction.

Determining the Minimally Important Change of the Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire in patients undergoing trigger finger release

INTRODUCTION

The Michigan Hand outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) is a widely used instrument to evaluate treatment results for hand conditions. Establishing the Minimally Important Change (MIC) is essential for interpreting change in outcome that is clinically relevant.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study was to determine the MIC of the MHQ total and subscale scores in patients undergoing trigger finger release.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a prospective cohort study conducted between December 2011 and February 2020.

METHODS

Patients completed the MHQ prior to surgery and 3 months postoperatively. The MIC of the MHQ was determined using 5 anchor-based methods (ie, 2 anchor mean change methods and 3 receiver operating characteristic methods). The median MIC value was determined to represent the triangulated MIC.

RESULTS

A total of 1814 patients were included. The MIC for the MHQ total score ranged from 7.7 to 10.9, with a triangulated estimate of 9.3. The MIC estimates for 5 of 6 of the MHQ subscales ranged from 7.7 to 20.0. No MICs could be determined for the MHQ subscale "aesthetics" due to low correlations between the anchor questions and MHQ change scores.

CONCLUSIONS

These MIC estimates can contribute to the interpretation of clinical outcomes following trigger finger release and for assessment of power in prospective trials.

Risk Factors Associated With Progression to Surgical Release After Injection of Trigger Digits

Introduction:

The mainstay of trigger finger treatment is a corticosteroid injection of the affected digits and is associated with a very high success rate. However, some patients do not respond to nonsurgical management and undergo subsequent surgical release. The purpose of this study is to investigate the comorbidities that predispose patients to progressing from injection to surgical release.

Methods:

Patient data were obtained from a national insurance database. All patients aged 20 years or older who underwent trigger digit injection were included. Any injection that did not specify the digit was excluded. Subsequent procedures, including repeat injection and surgical release, were identified using relevant Current Procedural Terminology codes. A multivariate model was constructed to evaluate potential risk factors for requiring release after prior injection of the same digit. Stepwise backward selection was used to retain significant variables.

Results:

A total of 42,537 trigger digits were identified in 31,830 patients, most of whom were female. The right hand was affected more commonly than the left. The middle and ring fingers were the most commonly affected digits. Over 80% of all trigger digits underwent only a single injection, and approximately 90% of injected digits did not require subsequent release. In the multivariate model, factors associated with higher risk of release were male sex, involvement of additional digits, multiple injections of the same digit, chronic pulmonary disease, HIV/AIDS, obesity, alcohol abuse, and depression. The model also found small fingers to be less likely to progress to release.

Discussion:

Patients with the risk factors identified in this study are more likely to progress to surgical release after trigger finger injection. Although prospective studies are required, the information may be beneficial in counseling patients and their treatment options.

Trigger Finger Treatment

Trigger finger is a frequent condition. Although tenosynovitis and the alteration of pulley A1 are identified as triggering factors, there is no consensus on the true cause in the literature, and its true etiology remains unknown. The diagnosis is purely clinical most of the time. It depends solely on the existence of finger locking during active bending movement. Trigger finger treatment usually begins with nonsurgical interventions that are instituted for at least 3 months. In patients with initial presentation with flexion deformity or inability to flex the finger, there may be earlier indication of surgical treatment due to pain intensity and functional disability. In the present review article, we will present the modalities and our algorithm for the treatment of trigger finger.

Current Concepts in the Management of Trigger Finger in Adults

Trigger finger (TF) is one of the most common causes of hand disability. Immobilization of TF with a joint-blocking orthosis has been demonstrated to effectively relieve pain and improve function. The efficacy of steroid injections for TF varies based on the number of affected digits and the clinical severity of the condition. Up to three repeat steroid injections are effective in most patients. When conservative interventions are unsuccessful, open surgical release of the A1 pulley effectively alleviates the subjective and objective manifestations of TF and currently remains the benchmark procedure for addressing TF. Although several studies have emerged suggesting that a percutaneous approach may result in improved outcomes, this technique demands a learning curve that may predispose patients to higher risk of procedure-related complications. There is no role for preoperative antibiotics in patients who undergo elective soft-tissue procedures of the hand. WALANT anesthesia has gained popularity because it has been associated with improved patient outcomes and a clear cost savings; however, proper patient selection is critical. Similar to other soft-tissue hand procedures, TF surgery rarely necessitates a postoperative opioid prescription.

A Critical Appraisal of Adult Trigger Finger: Pathophysiology, Treatment, and Future Outlook

Trigger finger (TF) is a common referral to a hand surgeon, with people with diabetess being the most at-risk population. Abnormal thickening, scarring, and inflammation occur at the A1 pulley and flexor tendon, and histological changes correlate well with the clinical severity of TF. Corticosteroid injections decrease the thickness of the A1 pulley and are considered a first-line treatment. However, corticosteroids are only moderately effective, especially for people with diabetes. Patients may elect for surgery if nonoperative treatments prove ineffective; some may choose immediate surgical release instead. To release the A1 pulley, patients have the option of an open or percutaneous approach. The open approach has a greater risk of infection and scar tissue formation in the short run but an overall superior long-term outcome compared with the percutaneous approach.

METHODS

We critically reviewed the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the treatment methods for TF through a comprehensive search of the PubMed Database from 2003 to 2019.

RESULTS

To reduce costs, while still delivering the best possible care, it is critical to consider the likelihood of success for each treatment method in each subpopulation. Furthermore, some patients may need to return to work promptly, which ultimately may influence their desired treatment method.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is no universal treatment algorithm for TF. From a purely financial standpoint, women without diabetes presenting with a single triggering thumb should attempt 2 corticosteroid trials before percutaneous release. It is the most cost-effective for all other subpopulations to elect for immediate percutaneous release.