Skip to main content

Table 1 Showing the number and percentage of patients treated with different prosthesis in this study. Furthermore, the table shows the different baseline characteristics within each prosthesis group with mean and 95% confidence intervals

From: Risk factors for limited improvement after total trapeziometacarpal joint arthroplasty

Prosthesis1, N = 622, N = 1423, N = 104, N = 415, N = 206, N = 12
Mean (95% CI)Mean (95% CI)Mean (95% CI)Mean (95% CI)Mean (95% CI)Mean (95% CI)
DASH37.5 (32.9–42.1)47.8 (44.2–51.3)36.7 (29.7–43.7)36.6 (30.4–42.8)34.3 (24.4–44.1)45.7 (29.6–62.8)
VAS activity7.7 (7.2–8.2)8.2 (7.9–8.5)7.1 (5.2–9.0)7.9 (7.3–8.5)7.5 (6.5–8.6)8.6 (7.2–9.8)
VAS rest3.5 (2.9–4.1)3.8 (3.4–4.3)3.0 (1.4–4.6)3.1 (2.3–3.9)2.9 (1.7–4.1)4.5 (3.5–5.5)
Grip strength24.1 (20.5–27.7)20.8 (18.8–22.7)25.9 (15.6.- 36.1)22.8 (17.6–28.0)22.7 (15.2–30.2)16.3 (5.9–26.8)
Age58.8 (56.3–59.8)58.5 (57.2–59.8)57.9 (51.2–64.6)60.5 (58.6–62.5)60.0 (56.7–63.3)60.4 (54.6–66.2)
  1. Prosthesis 1 = Elektra Bimetal cementless cup, prosthesis 2 = Moovis press-fit dual-mobility cementless cup, prosthesis 3 = Elektra cemented polyethylene cup, prosthesis 4 = Motec cemented polyethylene cup, prosthesis 5 = Motec cementless titanium cup, prosthesis 6 = Elektra cementless cup. All patients were treated with ball and socket design prosthesis with different cup designs combined with cementless titanium metacarpal stems. DASH = The disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand. Grip strength is measured in kg