{"title":"Thumb motion is not the same as first carpometacarpal joint motion","authors":"Joseph J. Crisco, Amy M. Morton, Douglas C. Moore","doi":"10.1016/j.jbiomech.2025.112590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Thumb motion is a key outcome metric for assessing disease progression or treatment efficacy. A literature review found nearly 25 % of recent papers incorrectly described their motion measurements as those of the first carpometacarpal (CMC) joint, when in fact their technology was only capable of measuring thumb motion. The aim of this manuscript is to clarify the importance of the accurate terminology and to rigorously examine the potential error by comparing thumb motion and CMC joint motion. Computed tomography (CT) images from 46 healthy subjects were analyzed using 3D markerless bone registration techniques to compute thumb rotation (first metacarpal (MC1) relative to the radius) and CMC joint rotation (MC1 relative to trapezium). We found thumb rotation was a poor measure of CMC joint rotation. For example, at thumb rotations of 20°, the true CMC joint rotations ranged from 3° to 30°. On average, thumb rotation over predicted CMC rotation by approximately 10°, with 95 % Limits of Agreement ranging from 30° (over estimating CMC joint motion) to −11° (underestimating CMC joint motion). Importantly, the character of the data demonstrated that CMC motion cannot be predicted from thumb motion. 3D CMC joint motion can only be assessed with skeletal imaging technologies; goniometers and skin-based markers can, at best, only measure thumb motion. Referring to goniometer and skin marker measurements as CMC joint motion is incorrect. It is critical that investigators be precise in their reporting of thumb motion versus CMC joint motion, especially when reporting interventions for thumb pathologies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15168,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomechanics","volume":"182 ","pages":"Article 112590"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021929025001010","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Thumb motion is a key outcome metric for assessing disease progression or treatment efficacy. A literature review found nearly 25 % of recent papers incorrectly described their motion measurements as those of the first carpometacarpal (CMC) joint, when in fact their technology was only capable of measuring thumb motion. The aim of this manuscript is to clarify the importance of the accurate terminology and to rigorously examine the potential error by comparing thumb motion and CMC joint motion. Computed tomography (CT) images from 46 healthy subjects were analyzed using 3D markerless bone registration techniques to compute thumb rotation (first metacarpal (MC1) relative to the radius) and CMC joint rotation (MC1 relative to trapezium). We found thumb rotation was a poor measure of CMC joint rotation. For example, at thumb rotations of 20°, the true CMC joint rotations ranged from 3° to 30°. On average, thumb rotation over predicted CMC rotation by approximately 10°, with 95 % Limits of Agreement ranging from 30° (over estimating CMC joint motion) to −11° (underestimating CMC joint motion). Importantly, the character of the data demonstrated that CMC motion cannot be predicted from thumb motion. 3D CMC joint motion can only be assessed with skeletal imaging technologies; goniometers and skin-based markers can, at best, only measure thumb motion. Referring to goniometer and skin marker measurements as CMC joint motion is incorrect. It is critical that investigators be precise in their reporting of thumb motion versus CMC joint motion, especially when reporting interventions for thumb pathologies.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Biomechanics publishes reports of original and substantial findings using the principles of mechanics to explore biological problems. Analytical, as well as experimental papers may be submitted, and the journal accepts original articles, surveys and perspective articles (usually by Editorial invitation only), book reviews and letters to the Editor. The criteria for acceptance of manuscripts include excellence, novelty, significance, clarity, conciseness and interest to the readership.
Papers published in the journal may cover a wide range of topics in biomechanics, including, but not limited to:
-Fundamental Topics - Biomechanics of the musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems, mechanics of hard and soft tissues, biofluid mechanics, mechanics of prostheses and implant-tissue interfaces, mechanics of cells.
-Cardiovascular and Respiratory Biomechanics - Mechanics of blood-flow, air-flow, mechanics of the soft tissues, flow-tissue or flow-prosthesis interactions.
-Cell Biomechanics - Biomechanic analyses of cells, membranes and sub-cellular structures; the relationship of the mechanical environment to cell and tissue response.
-Dental Biomechanics - Design and analysis of dental tissues and prostheses, mechanics of chewing.
-Functional Tissue Engineering - The role of biomechanical factors in engineered tissue replacements and regenerative medicine.
-Injury Biomechanics - Mechanics of impact and trauma, dynamics of man-machine interaction.
-Molecular Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of biomolecules.
-Orthopedic Biomechanics - Mechanics of fracture and fracture fixation, mechanics of implants and implant fixation, mechanics of bones and joints, wear of natural and artificial joints.
-Rehabilitation Biomechanics - Analyses of gait, mechanics of prosthetics and orthotics.
-Sports Biomechanics - Mechanical analyses of sports performance.