• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of hand therapy: Official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists >A comparison of high-profile and low-profile dynamic mobilization splint designs.
【24h】

A comparison of high-profile and low-profile dynamic mobilization splint designs.

机译：高调和低调动态动员夹板设计的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Despite claims that the high-profile dynamic mobilization splint design requires less frequent adjustments than the low-profile design, the authors are not aware of biomechanical evidence supporting such claims. The purpose of this study was to reexamine this claim and quantitatively analyze each design as well as the differences between designs with respect to the actual deviation from a 90 degrees angle of applied force for 60 degrees, 30 degrees, 20 degrees, and 10 degrees gains in proximal interphalangeal joint (PIP) extension. Additionally, for 10 degrees, 20 degrees, and 30 degrees gains in PIP extension, the authors determined the corrective and shear forces as a function of the deviation from a 90 degrees angle of applied force for each design, as well as the difference between the designs. Results show that in all instances examined, the actual difference between the designs is quite small. Implications of such findings are discussed along with newly identified relationships of potential utility to the hand therapist.
机译：尽管声称高姿态的动态动员夹板设计比低姿态的设计需要更少的调整频率，但作者们并不知道支持这种主张的生物力学证据。这项研究的目的是重新审视此主张，并定量分析每个设计以及设计之间的差异，这些差异涉及相对于施加力的90度角在60度，30度，20度和10度增益下的实际偏差。在近端指间关节（PIP）延伸中。此外，对于PIP扩展的10度，20度和30度增益，作者确定了校正力和剪切力是每种设计相对于施加力90度角的偏差的函数，以及设计。结果表明，在所有检查的实例中，设计之间的实际差异都很小。讨论了这些发现的含义以及对手部治疗师的新发现的潜在效用关系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号