Background
The nomenclature surrounding the 'flexor digiti minimi brevis' muscle prompts deliberation concerning its accuracy and potential variations. Addressing this uncertainty entails expunging the term 'brevis' from nomenclature references to the muscle, opting instead for the term 'flexor digiti minimi.' This nomenclatural adjustment currently being advocated raises inquiries about the necessity for descriptors denoting the muscle's specific placement along the upper or lower extremities. This study was conducted with a dual objective: to illuminate this topic and consolidate existing research on this issue.
Main body of the abstract
Research encompassing the terms 'flexor digiti minimi' OR 'flexor digiti minimi brevis' was screened within this field. The inclusion criteria involved original articles, case reports, case series, relevant books, and book chapters. Excluded from this review were articles mentioning 'flexor digiti minimi' and 'digiti minimi' that were unrelated to the subject, as well as poster presentations, proceedings, conference materials, abstracts, and atlases.
Short conclusion
In summary, changing the name of the muscle enhances anatomical understanding, promotes clarity and precision in communication, facilitates research efforts, and helps prevent confusion in medical education and clinical practice. These benefits highlight the importance of revising nomenclature to reflect anatomical accuracy and improve healthcare outcomes. It also promotes consistency in studies and allows for more meaningful comparisons across studies, ultimately advancing our understanding of anatomical variations and their clinical significance. Furthermore, it allows for more effective teaching and learning experiences, enabling medical practitioners to make accurate diagnoses, develop effective treatment strategies.