COVID-19 studies are our top priority. For all other trials, there is a 4-week delay in processing a trial submitted/resubmitted to the ANZCTR and additional delays for updates of registered trials. We appreciate your patience.

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers
Trial registered on ANZCTR

Registration number
Ethics application status
Date submitted
Date registered
Date last updated
Date data sharing statement initially provided
Date results information initially provided
Type of registration
Retrospectively registered

Titles & IDs
Public title
The comparison of 3D printed and thermoplastic oval eight finger orthoses: A randomised crossover trial.
Scientific title
The comparison of 3D printed and thermoplastic oval eight finger orthoses in a healthy cohort, a comparison of hand function, occupational performance and satisfaction, and orthoses characteristics : A randomised crossover trial.
Secondary ID [1] 300642 0
Nil known
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Trial acronym
Linked study record

Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
The use of this orthosis is to prevent hyper extension of the PIPJ when injured through varied conditions including central slip injury 316425 0
boutonniere deformity 316593 0
dislocation 316594 0
Rheumatoid arthritis. 316595 0
Condition category
Condition code
Physical Medicine / Rehabilitation 314684 314684 0 0
Occupational therapy
Inflammatory and Immune System 314820 314820 0 0
Rheumatoid arthritis

Study type
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Participants were randomised to wear either a 3D printed or a thermoplastic oval eight finger orthosis for 24-hours, given a 24-hour washout period, followed by wearing the second orthosis for a further 24-hours.
A 3D printed orthosis was created by the principal investigator, who created the orthosis initially on a CAD program and then printed via a desktop 3D printer, Lulzbot mini, using ABS 2mm filament. Each participant had there finger measured using a tape measure, at the middle and proximal phalanx of the index finger, and these measurement were input to the CAD program to create the custom made orthosis. The print time was approximately 30 minutes and then any minor rough aspects were smoothed with fine grit sandpaper.
The thermoplastic was created by the principal investigator using current best practice methods. A 10 cm piece of Aquaplast thermoplastic was heated in a heat bath at 70 degrees. Once softened the participant was asked to rest their elbow on the table with their hand directly above, the principal investigator then molded the thermoplastic to the index finger at the PIPJ, creating the currently used orthosis. Any excess thermoplastic material was cut away.
Once the two orthosis were created by the principal investigator the second investigator took all baseline measurement, with orthosis in place.
The participant was randomised to wearing one of the two orthosis initially, which they were given verbal and written instructions on correct wearing and safety. The participant then wore the orthosis for 24 hours. They were then contacted by phone by the second investigator and outcome measures taken. The participant had a 24 hour washout period of not wearing an orthosis. The participant then wore the second of the two orthosis for a further 24 hours, again at the end of the wear period they were contact by phone by the second investigator to complete the outcome measures.
The participant attended a secure room at the university to have the orthosis fitted, and base line measures completed. The participant wore the orthosis in their standard day to day life, and were contacted at a convenient time by phone to collect outcome measures.
The participant were given a daily diary to write down any occasions that they removed the orthosis in the 24 hour wear period, and for what reason, they then read this to the second investigator when contacted by phone.
Intervention code [1] 316973 0
Treatment: Devices
Comparator / control treatment
Cross over design: Participants were exposed to both the traditional orthosis (thermoplastic) and the new intervention, 3D printed orthosis.
Control group

Primary outcome [1] 323011 0
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)
Timepoint [1] 323011 0
after 24 hour wear period of each orthosis
Secondary outcome [1] 380516 0
Grip strength of the hand using a Jamar Dynam0meter, handle position 2, three attempts taken and the average strength recorded.
Timepoint [1] 380516 0
at baseline with each orthosis on situ.
Secondary outcome [2] 380867 0
Tip to tip strength, using pinch gauge. Tip of index finger and tip of thumb, three attempts taken and average.
Timepoint [2] 380867 0
At baseline with each orthosis in situ.
Secondary outcome [3] 380868 0
Range of motion (ROM) of the PIPJ. A 15cm plastic gonimoter used to measure full extension and flexion of the PIPJ of the finger.
Timepoint [3] 380868 0
AT base line with orthosis in situ.

Key inclusion criteria
Over 18 years of age, a staff member or student from the Occupational Therapy course at an Australian University and were able to provide informed consent, no current (acute) hand injury.
Minimum age
18 Years
Maximum age
No limit
Both males and females
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Key exclusion criteria
Unable to wear a finger orthosis for a total of 48 hours or had a current upper limb injury or condition, or were unable to read or understand English

Study design
Purpose of the study
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
central randomisation by phone/fax/computer
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Online randomisation tool.
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Who is / are masked / blinded?

Intervention assignment
Other design features
Participants provided a washout period of 24 hours between wearing each orthosis.
Not Applicable
Type of endpoint(s)
Statistical methods / analysis
Data was tested for normal distribution using The Shapiro-Wilk test (Field, 2013). Descriptive statistics, Paired t-tests for parametric data (Taylor, 2017) and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for non-parametric data (Taylor, 2017) were used to analyse differences between the two orthoses in hand function data, performance and satisfaction components of the COPM, as well as results from the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire. Qualitative data gathered from the COPM and Client Satisfaction Questionnaire were analysed using conceptual content analysis to enrich quantitative findings (Schreier, 2012).

Recruitment status
Date of first participant enrolment
Date of last participant enrolment
Date of last data collection
Sample size
Accrual to date
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
Recruitment postcode(s) [1] 29479 0
3220 - Geelong

Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1] 305066 0
Name [1] 305066 0
Deakin University
Address [1] 305066 0
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria, Australia 3220
Country [1] 305066 0
Primary sponsor type
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria, Australia, 3220
Secondary sponsor category [1] 305433 0
Name [1] 305433 0
Address [1] 305433 0
Country [1] 305433 0

Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Ethics committee name [1] 305454 0
Deakin University, Faculty of Health Human Ethics Advisory Group
Ethics committee address [1] 305454 0
Deakin University Locked Bag 20000 Geelong VIC 3220
Ethics committee country [1] 305454 0
Date submitted for ethics approval [1] 305454 0
Approval date [1] 305454 0
Ethics approval number [1] 305454 0
HEAG-H 58_2019

Brief summary
The first aim of this study is to compare hand function in terms of range of motion, tip pinch strength and hand grip strength, when wearing the 3D printed and thermoplastic finger orthosis. The null hypothesis is there is no difference in each of the hand function measures between the two orthoses. The second aim is to investigate the impact that wearing a 3D printed and a thermoplastic orthosis has on everyday activities. The null hypothesis is there is no difference in occupational performance and satisfaction between the two orthoses. Lastly, the third aim is to investigate client satisfaction of wearing the two orthoses in terms of appearance, comfort, convenience, durability and water retention. The null hypothesis is there is no difference in each of the client satisfaction questionnaire items between the two orthoses
Trial website
Trial related presentations / publications
Public notes

Principal investigator
Name 100438 0
Mr Pearse Patrick Andrew Fay
Address 100438 0
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria, 3220
Country 100438 0
Phone 100438 0
+61 352278322
Fax 100438 0
Email 100438 0
Contact person for public queries
Name 100439 0
Mr Pearse Patrick Andrew Fay
Address 100439 0
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria 3220
Country 100439 0
Phone 100439 0
+61 352278322
Fax 100439 0
Email 100439 0
Contact person for scientific queries
Name 100440 0
Mr Pearse Patrick Andrew Fay
Address 100440 0
Deakin University
1 Gherighap Street, Geelong, Victoria 3220
Country 100440 0
Phone 100440 0
+61 352278322
Fax 100440 0
Email 100440 0

Data sharing statement
Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?
What data in particular will be shared?
Raw data of results is available upon request.
When will data be available (start and end dates)?
October 2019 - No end date
Available to whom?
Publicly available upon request
Available for what types of analyses?
Viewing of raw data for evidence of statistical analysis
How or where can data be obtained?
Data can be requested from the principal investigator via email request,
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No other documents available
Summary results
Have study results been published in a peer-reviewed journal?
Other publications
Have study results been made publicly available in another format?
Other publication details
Citation type [1] 7084 0
Citation/DOI/link/details [1] 7084 0
The results have been presented in an oral presentation at Australian Hand Therapy Association National conference Brisbane, Qld. 2019
Attachments [1] 7084 0
Results – basic reporting
Results – plain English summary