Abstract-A kinematic model is presented based on surface marker placement generating wrist, metacarpal arch, fingers and thumb movements. Standard calculations are used throughout the model and then applied to the specified marker placement. A static trial involving eight unimpaired participants was carried out to assess inter-rater reliability. The standard deviations across the data were comparable to manual goniometers. In addition, a test-retest trial of ten unimpaired participants is also reported to illustrate the variability of movement at the wrist joint, metacarpal arch, and index finger as an example of model output when repeating the same task many times.

The Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) was devised to assess quantitatively the functional range of injured and healthy adult hands. It was designed to be a practical tool for use in a busy clinical setting; thus, it was made simple to use and easy to interpret. This paper describes four examples of its use: before and after a surgical procedure, to observe the impact of an injury, use with prostheses, and during recovery following a fracture. The cases show that the SHAP is capable of monitoring progress and recovery, identifying functional abilities in prosthetic hands and comparing the capabilities of different groups of injuries.

Abstract

Dynamic movements of the hand, fingers, and thumb are difficult to measure due to the versatility and complexity of movement inherent in function. An innovative approach to measuring hand kinematics is proposed and validated. The proposed system utilizes the Microsoft Kinect and goes beyond gesture recognition to develop a validated measurement technique of finger kinematics. The proposed system adopted landmark definition (validated through ground truth estimation against assessors) and grip classification algorithms, including kinematic definitions (validated against a laboratory-based motion capture system). The results of the validation show 78% accuracy when identifying specific markerless landmarks. In addition, comparative data with a previously validated kinematic measurement technique show accuracy of MCP ± 10° (average absolute error (AAE) = 2.4°), PIP ± 12° (AAE = 4.8°), and DIP ± 11° (AAE = 4.8°). These results are notably better than clinically based alternative manual measurement techniques. The ability to measure hand movements, and therefore functional dexterity, without interfering with underlying composite movements, is the paramount objective to any bespoke measurement system. The proposed system is the first validated markerless measurement system using the Microsoft Kinect that is capable of measuring finger joint kinematics. It is suitable for home-based motion capture for the hand and, therefore, achieves this objective.

We systematically reviewed all the evidence published in the English language on proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) replacement, to determine its effectiveness on the function of the hand and the associated post-operative complications. Original studies were selected if they reported clinical outcome with a minimum of one year's follow-up. Quality was assessed using the Cowley systematic review criteria modified for finger-joint replacements. Of 319 articles identified, only five were adequately reported according to our quality criteria; there were no randomised controlled trials. PIPJ replacements had a substantial effect size on hand pain of -23.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) -27.3 to -19.1) and grip strength 1.2 (95% CI -10.7 to 13.1), and a small effect on range of movement 0.2 (95% CI -0.4 to 0.8). A dorsal approach was most successful. Post-operative loosening occurred in 10% (95% CI 3 to 30) of ceramic and 12.5% (95% CI 7 to 21) of pyrocarbon replacements. Post-operative complications occurred in 27.8% (95% CI 20 to 37). We conclude that the effectiveness of PIPJ replacement has not been established. Small observational case studies and short-term follow-up, together with insufficient reporting of patient data, functional outcomes and complications, limit the value of current evidence. We recommend that a defined core set of patients, surgical and outcome data for this intervention be routinely and systematically collected within the framework of a joint registry.