Effectiveness of manual therapy in patients with thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of Manual Therapy (MT) in thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (OA) is unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of MT for functional outcomes in patients with thumb carpometacarpal OA. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. METHODS: An electronic search was performed in the Medline, Central, Embase, PEDro, Lilacs, Cinahl, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies included randomized clinical trials that compared MT versus other interventions in functional outcomes, such as thumb and/or hand function questionnaires, pinch and/or grip strength, thumb and/or hand range of motion, and pain intensity or pressure pain threshold in patients with thumb carpometacarpal OA. RESULTS: Five clinical trials met the eligibility criteria; for the quantitative synthesis, four studies were included. The mean difference (MD) for grip strength was 0.87kg (95% CI = 0.29-1.44, p = .003), for pinch strength was 0.10kg (95% CI = -0.01-0.20, p = .06), and for the pressure pain threshold was 0.64kg/cm2 (95% CI = 0.07-1.20, p = .03). All differences were in favor of the MT group. CONCLUSIONS: In the short-term, there was moderate to high evidence, with statistically significant differences in the functional outcomes, in favor of MT versus sham interventions in patients with thumb carpometacarpal OA. However, these differences are not clinically important.

A randomized controlled trial of real versus sham acupuncture for basal thumb joint arthritis.

We report a single-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing acupuncture to sham (non-penetrating) needling for relief of symptoms of basal thumb joint arthritis. Seventy acupuncture naive patients with basal thumb joint arthritis were randomized to receive true acupuncture or sham needling with 35 patients in each arm. Blinded baseline and post-treatment assessments included visual analogue pain scores for different grips and movement. Function was assessed using the Nelson questionnaire. Both groups showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in pain at week one post-treatment compared with baseline, but there was no difference between the treatment groups. The pain relief was comparable with published data for some standard treatments. Acupuncture did not perform better than sham needling in this study, indicating that pain relief may have been achieved through non-specific mechanisms. Level of evidence: I.