A national survey of conservative mallet finger injury care and the potential for 3D printing to impact current practice

• Development and use of a survey to assess healthcare professionals’ current practices when treating mallet injuries. • There remains a lack of custom care in relation to the use of orthosis for treatment of mallet injury. • Participants were open to the use of 3D printing in clinical practice, despite some concerns related to time, lack of expertise and clinical limitations. Custom orthoses provided by a skilled therapist are deemed the gold standard of care for the treatment of mallet injury, but traditional orthoses are still used. It is unclear to what extent custom orthoses versus traditional off the shelf variants are currently provided to treat mallet injury. The study aims to investigate current practice regarding the conservative treatment of mallet injury in Ireland. The study also aims to assess healthcare providers' awareness of and opinions to the use of 3D printing in healthcare. This study was cross-sectional in design and used an online survey methodology. Healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of mallet injuries from both public and private settings were eligible for inclusion. Data collection involved convenience and snowball sampling with the survey being promoted by professional bodies, distributed at national meetings and circulated via social media. Data analysis took place in Excel and comprised descriptive statistics. In total 86 participants completed the survey including nurses (58 %), doctors (2 8 %), allied health professionals (9 %) and other healthcare professionals (5 %). Non personalised orthosis including the Stack splint were most frequently applied (58 %). Regarding 3D printing, 52 % of participants reported they were not aware of 3DP in healthcare. However, 80 % overall said they would be interested in using it in the future. The inference from this is that they have a positive attitude toward the use of 3D printing, considering they have a low knowledge of using it in this discipline. This study provides an insight into healthcare professionals’ recent experiences of treating mallet injuries in the Irish healthcare system. There remains a lack of custom orthosis creation to treat mallet injury. The respondent's openness to using 3D printing technology is promising and suggests that in the future 3D printing of custom orthoses may have a role in the treatment of mallet injuries. However, custom care, and not just a custom orthosis, would provide patients with optimal treatment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annals of 3D Printed Medicine
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stlm.2024.100184
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Anatomy and Medical Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.18

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A national survey of conservative mallet finger injury care and the potential for 3D printing to impact current practice

Una M. Cronin, Niamh M. Cummins, Aidan O’ Sullivan, Prof. Damien Ryan et al.
1 citations
Annals of 3D Printed Medicine
Anatomy and Medical Technology
0.18
article

A national survey of conservative mallet finger injury care and the potential for 3D printing to impact current practice

Una M. Cronin, Niamh M. Cummins, Aidan O’ Sullivan, Prof. Damien Ryan, Prof. Leonard O'Sullivan
article en
1 citations

Abstract

• Development and use of a survey to assess healthcare professionals’ current practices when treating mallet injuries. • There remains a lack of custom care in relation to the use of orthosis for treatment of mallet injury. • Participants were open to the use of 3D printing in clinical practice, despite some concerns related to time, lack of expertise and clinical limitations. Custom orthoses provided by a skilled therapist are deemed the gold standard of care for the treatment of mallet injury, but traditional orthoses are still used. It is unclear to what extent custom orthoses versus traditional off the shelf variants are currently provided to treat mallet injury. The study aims to investigate current practice regarding the conservative treatment of mallet injury in Ireland. The study also aims to assess healthcare providers' awareness of and opinions to the use of 3D printing in healthcare. This study was cross-sectional in design and used an online survey methodology. Healthcare professionals involved in the treatment of mallet injuries from both public and private settings were eligible for inclusion. Data collection involved convenience and snowball sampling with the survey being promoted by professional bodies, distributed at national meetings and circulated via social media. Data analysis took place in Excel and comprised descriptive statistics. In total 86 participants completed the survey including nurses (58 %), doctors (2 8 %), allied health professionals (9 %) and other healthcare professionals (5 %). Non personalised orthosis including the Stack splint were most frequently applied (58 %). Regarding 3D printing, 52 % of participants reported they were not aware of 3DP in healthcare. However, 80 % overall said they would be interested in using it in the future. The inference from this is that they have a positive attitude toward the use of 3D printing, considering they have a low knowledge of using it in this discipline. This study provides an insight into healthcare professionals’ recent experiences of treating mallet injuries in the Irish healthcare system. There remains a lack of custom orthosis creation to treat mallet injury. The respondent's openness to using 3D printing technology is promising and suggests that in the future 3D printing of custom orthoses may have a role in the treatment of mallet injuries. However, custom care, and not just a custom orthosis, would provide patients with optimal treatment.

Annals of 3D Printed MedicineVol. 17
University of Limerick (IE), University Hospital Limerick (IE), Monash Health (AU), Monash University (AU)
Science Foundation Ireland, European Regional Development Fund
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 50%
Anatomy and Medical Technology
0.18
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.