Bilateral sensory and motor effects of unilateral combined treatment in patients with carpo-metacarpal osteoarthritis

INTERVENTION: Treatment group Kaltenborn mobilization: 1. The therapist grasps the right thumb metacarpal bone of the patient with his right thumb‐index fingers 2. The therapist distracts the joint retracting the thumb and gliding the first metacarpal bone in a posterior‐anterior direction 3. A posterior‐anterior gliding of short amplitude with distraction of the thumb CMC joint was applied for 3 minutes with a 1 minute pause 4. The mobilization sequence was repeated 3 times Median nerve mobilization. 1. The patient was positioned in supine and the therapist was seated 2. The physical therapist induces shoulder girdle depression, gleno‐humeral abduction and lateral rotation, supination of the forearm, wrist, thumb, and finger extension of the patient?s arm 3. The slider neurodynamic technique of the median nerve consists of alternation of elbow extension (loads the median nerve) and wrist flexion (unloads the median nerve), with elbow flexion (unloading) and wrist extension (loading) 4. The range of motion was: wrist 0‐60° extension; elbow 90‐165° extension depending on the tissue resistance 5. The slider intervention was completed over 5‐10 minutes in two sets of 5min each with 1min rest between sets 6. Speed and amplitude of movement were adjusted such that no pain was produced during the technique Radial nerve mobilization: 1. Treatment was performed in six sessions over four weeks and was applied to the dominant hand three times during a four‐minute period with one‐minute pauses between periods 2. The technique consisted of a sliding mobilization of the proximal‐distal radial nerve 3. To begin the technique, the patient was positioned in supine and the physiotherapist was seated 4. The physiotherapist depressed the patient?s shoulder girdle, extended the patient?s elbow and then internally rotated the arm 5. The patient?s wrist, thumb and all the fingers were flexed. Finally ulnar deviation of the hand was added 6. This combination of movements is hypothesized to cause s CONDITION: Thumb carpo‐metacarpal osteoarthritis ; Musculoskeletal Diseases ; Arthrosis of first carpometacarpal joint INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Patients who used the dominant hand systematically such as ex‐factory workers and home workers 2. Diagnosed with secondary thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC OA) in the dominant hand by X‐ray detection of stage III and IV according to the Eaton‐Littler‐Burton Classification PRIMARY OUTCOME: 1. Mechanical pain sensitivity: ; 1.1. Pain sensitivity was determined by measuring pressure pain threshold (PPT); 1.2. Measurements were performed with a Mechanical Pressure Algometer (Wagner Instruments, Greenwich, Connecticut, USA) with a 1cm2 rubber‐tipped plunger mounted on a force transducer was used for measuring PPT; 1.3. Pressure was applied at a rate of 30 kPa/s; 1.4. The mean of three measurements was calculated and used for the main analysis; 1.5. Previous papers have reported an intraexaminer reliability of this procedure ranging from 0.6 to 0.97, while the interexaminer reliability ranged from 0.4 to 0.98; 1.6. The following points were evaluated:; 1.6.1. TM joint at the bottom of the anatomical snuffbox, tubercle of the scaphoid bone and unciform apophysis of the hamate bone; 1.6.2. Three measurements were made with a one‐minute pause between them; 1.6.3. Although pain from deep tissue is difficult to assess precisely, PPT have been found useful in assessing pain reactions in OA patients; 2. Pain evaluation:; 2.1. The main outcome of the study was pain intensity; 2.2. The intensity of thumb CMC joint pain was assessed with a 100mm visual analogue scale (VAS); 2.3. The VAS is a 100mm line anchored with a 0 at one end representing no pain and 100 at the other end representing the worst pain imaginable. ; 2.4. The VAS was selected as the main outcome measure based on its ability to detect changes with a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) ranging from 9 to 11 mm; 3. Motor performance: ; 3.1. Pinch strength ; 3.1.1. The pinch strength was evaluated with a mechanical pinch gauge (Baseline, NY, USA) in the sitting position with the shoulder adducted and neutrally rotated and the elbow flexed at 90° ; 3.1.2. Two different measurements were taken. First the tip pinch between index and thumb fingers is measured. Then the tripod pinch, between index and, middle fingers and the thumb is measured; 3.1.3. The reliability of pinch strength has been found to be high (Intra‐class correlation coefficient [ICC]= 0.93); 3.2. Grip strength ; 3.2.1. Grip strength was assessed with a grip dynamometer (Baseline, NY, USA) with the patient in the sitting position; 3.2.2. This procedure has shown to have a precision of ± 3% (15‐17); 3.2.3. The reliability of grip strength has been reported to be high (ICC: 0.82‐ 0.97); ; Measurements were taken before intervention and after 1 and 2 months. SECONDARY OUTCOME: 1. The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) ; 1.1. Review of internal consistency for the BDI ranges from 0.73 to 0.92, with a mean of 0.86, with alpha coefficients of 0.86 and 0.81 for psychiatric and non‐psychiatric populations, respectively; 1.2. The BDI observed showed high discrimination of depressive symptoms (75‐100%); 2. State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI); 2.1. This is a self rated questionnaire divided in two parts: anxiety‐trait (referring to personality aspects) and anxiety‐state (referring to systemic aspects of the context); 2.2. Responses are in a 1‐4 scale; 2.3. Anxiety‐state refers to how individuals feel ?at the moment? and anxiety‐trait to how they ?generally feel?; 2.4. Each part varies from 20 to 80 points, and the scores indicate low (0‐30), medium (31‐49) or high (50 or more) anxiety levels; ; Measurements were taken before intervention and after 1 and 2 months.