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.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.