The Journal of Korean Physical Therapy

The Korean Society of Physical Therapy (대한물리치료학회)
권호 표지

Effects of Compression Materials on Hand Dexterity in the 40's Healthy Subjects: A Preliminary Study

  • Rhee, Hyeon-Sook (Department of occupational therapy, Shinsung University) ;
  • Yu, Jae-Ho (Department of Physical therapy, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Kim, Sung-Joong (Department of Physical therapy, Kangwon National University)
  • Received : 2011.10.24
  • Accepted : 2011.11.29
  • Published : 2011.12.26
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this preliminary study was to use hand function tests to Hand dexterity levels provided by the type of compression garment and compression bandages in asymptomatic subjects and to collect baseline data for the comparison of hand functions in the patients with chronic arm lymphedema. Methods: The subjects of this study were 32 healthy volunteer female with a mean age of 45.8 years. Grip strength and hand functions were tested in three conditions-no compression, compression garment, and compression bandages-using the nine-hole peg test (NHPT), the box and block test (B&BT), Minnesota Manual Dexterity test (MMDT), and the hand-held Jamar dynamometer. Results: The grip strength was significantly low in the bandage condition (p<0.05). The performance in both compression groups (i.e., bandage and compression garment) decreased as the thickness of the compression material increased (p<0.05). Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that grip strength and hand function scores are influenced by the characteristics of the compression applied. Future study is needed to determine the level of hand function between patients with chronic arm lymphedema and healthy individuals.

Keywords

References

  1. Brennan M.J, Weitz J. Lymphedema 30 years after radical mastectomy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1992;71(1):12-14. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002060-199202000-00004
  2. Didem K, Ufuk YS, Serdar S, et al. The comparison of two different physiotherapy methods in treatment of lymphedema after breast surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;93(1): 49-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-005-3781-2
  3. Passik SD, McDonald MV. Psychosocial aspects of upper extremity lymphedema in women treated for breast carcinoma. Cancer. 1998;83(12 Suppl Am):2817-2820.
  4. Brennan MJ, DePompolo RW, Garden FH. Focused review: postmastectomy lymphedema, Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77(3Suppl):S74-S80.
  5. Boris M, Weindorf S. Persistence of lymphedema reduction after noninvasive complex lymphedema therapy. Oncology. 1997;11(1):99-109.
  6. Chikly B. Theory and practice of lymph drainage therapy. Arizona, I. H. H. Publishing. 2001: 231-284.
  7. Clodius L, Foldi M. Therapy for lymphedema today. Int Angiol. 1984;3:207-213.
  8. Clark B, Sitzia J, Harlow W. Incidence and risk of arm oedema following treatment for breast cancer: a three-year follow-up study. QJM. 2005;98(5):343-348. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hci053
  9. Foldi E. Treatment of lymphedema and patient rehabilitation. Anticancer Res. 1998;18(3C): 2211-2212.
  10. Meric F, Buchholz TA, Mirza NQ, et al. Long-term complications associated with breast-conservation surgery and radiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(6):543-549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02573889
  11. MacWayne J, Heiney SP. Psychologic and Social Sequelae of Secondary Lymphedema; A review. Cancer. 2005;104(3): 457-466. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21195
  12. US Department of Labor. A guide to job analysis: a how to publication for occupational analysis. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. 1982
  13. Liao SF, Huang MS, Li SH, et al. Complex decongestive physiotherapy for patients with chronic cancer-associated lymphedema. J Formos Med Assoc. 2004;103:344-348.
  14. Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, et al. Adult norms for the Box and Blocks Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther. 1985;39:386-391. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.39.6.386
  15. Desrosiers J, Bravo G, Hébert R, et al. Validation of the Box and Block Test as a measure of dexterity of elderly people: reliability, validity, and norms studies. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1984;75(7):751-755.
  16. Lourencao MP, Battistella LR, Martins LC, et al. Analysis of the results of functional electrical stimulation on hemiplegic patients' upper extremities using the Minnesota manual dexterity test. Int J Rehabil Res. 2005;28(1):25-31. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-200503000-00004
  17. Daanen HA. Manual Performance Deterioration in the Cold Estimated Using the Wind Chill Equivalent Temperature. Ind Health. 2009;47(3):262-270. https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.47.262
  18. Ittyerah M. Hand skill and hand preference in blind and sighted children. Laterality. 2000;5(3):221-235.
  19. Laseter GF. Management of the stiff hand: a practical approach. Orthop Clin North Am. 1983;14(4):749-765.
  20. Saunders SR. Physical therapy management of hand fractures. Phys Ther. 1989;69(12):1065-1076.
  21. Berger MA, Krul AJ, Daanen HA. Task specificity of finger dexterity tests. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(1):145-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.01.014
  22. Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, et al. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1969;50(6):311-319.
  23. National Cancer center. Cancer incidence in Korea 2008. Ministry of Health and Welfare, Seoul. 2010.