Table 5. Comparison of metacarpal length in various studies (mm).
| Author | n | Study type | 1st MC | 2nd MC | 3rd MC | 4th MC | 5th MC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Our study, India |
100 | CT scan | 43.9 | 63.4 | 61.7 | 54.3 | 49.1 |
| Michael Okoli, Philadelphia 8 |
57 | CT scan | 67.6 | 64.2 | 56.7 | 51.4 | |
| Abdullah Örs, Turkey 9 |
105 | CT scan | 66.3 | 63.5 | 54.6 | 50.5 | |
| Andrew Sephien, Florida 10 | 140 | X-ray | 68.7 | 66.6 | 58.9 | 53.9 | |
| Doaa A. El Morsi, Egypt 7 |
100 | X-ray | 46.5 | 68.4 | 65.4 | 57.5 | 54.1 |
| D. Troy Case, North Carolina 13 |
20 | Dry bones Osteometric board |
44.8 | 64.0 | 61.5 | 55.3 | 51.3 |
Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; MC, metacarpal.