Evaluating Palpation Guided Injections in Trapeziometacarpal Arthritis

August 7, 2018 updated by: Prisma Health-Upstate
The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of trapeziometacarpal injections using palpation alone. The importance of this study is one of education, cost containment, and decreased risk to the patient. If it can be shown that the accuracy of trapeziometacarpal injections using palpation alone is similar to the reported accuracy of ultrasound and fluoroscopy, then these guided techniques may not be needed.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of trapeziometacarpal injections using palpation alone. If it can be shown that the accuracy of trapeziometacarpal injections using palpation alone is similar to the reported accuracy of ultrasound and fluoroscopy, then fluoroscopy and ultrasound guided techniques may not be needed. Due to the expenses associated with medications and testing, it is important to not accrue unnecessary costs if there is no perceived benefit. The investigators plan to enroll 50 patients presenting with trapeziometacarpal joint arthritis who agree to participate. These participants will undergo an injection technique consisting of palpating the base of the thumb and placing the needle into the trapeziometacarpal joint without the guidance of ultrasound or fluoroscopy. Contrast dye will be included in the standard injection of lidocaine and corticosteroid. After injection, the participant will have 2 fluoroscopy views of the thumb. The images will not be evaluated for injection accuracy prior to the patient leaving the clinic, so as to not introduce any bias by the treating physician. These images will be blindly reviewed by three investigators at a later date, and determined by consensus if there is contrast material in the joint. The accuracy rate can then be compared to data regarding accuracy of fluoroscopic and ultrasound guided injections of the trapeziometacarpal joint. If there is a similar accuracy rate between modalities, it can be concluded that ultrasound may not be worth the added cost to the patient and fluoroscopy may not be worth the added cost or radiation to the participant. Additionally, participants will be contacted at 6 weeks post injection to evaluate post-injection arthritis symptoms.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

37

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • South Carolina
      • Greenville, South Carolina, United States, 29615
        • The Hand Center

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

All patients diagnosed with trapeziometacarpal arthritis and a treatment plan including intra-articular steroid injections

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • The patient has clinical signs of trapeziometacarpal arthritis and are willing to obtain a post injection x-ray
  • The patient is over the age of 18 years of age.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • The patient has a known allergy to contrast dye
  • The patient has a planned surgery on the trapeziometacarpal joint within 6 weeks following injection
  • Patients who are pregnant or believe they may be pregnant
  • Prisoners
  • Patients who are unable to provide informed consent

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Accuracy of injection
Time Frame: radiograph immediately after injection (<5 mins)
Accuracy judged in a blinded fashion, rated injection in joint or out of joint
radiograph immediately after injection (<5 mins)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: John Sanders, MD, Prisma Health-Upstate

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

May 1, 2017

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 15, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

September 15, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 8, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 9, 2017

First Posted (Actual)

May 10, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 8, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 7, 2018

Last Verified

August 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • PRO00059888

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Injection Site

Clinical Trials on Arthrogram

3
Subscribe