Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aim: To evaluate the reliability, validity, and feasibility of 3D-printed short arm casts (SACs) versus conventional casts. Methods: Three raters of varying experience applied two conventional and two 3D-printed casts to a participant's dominant wrist to evaluate reliability. Each cast was worn for 24 h and removed the following day after data collection. Results & conclusion: ICCs demonstrated ‘excellent’ intra-rater reliability for clinical effectiveness and patient satisfaction. There were no significant differences between fiberglass and 3D-printed SACs. The 3D-printed SAC group had significantly higher wrist function compared with the fiberglass SAC group. Discussion: This pilot case study demonstrates that 3D-printed short arm casts may be a valid immobilization technique of the wrist compared with conventional waterproof fiberglass casting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smith et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: