Background: This study attempted a comparative analysis of three splint fabrication methods currently used in clinical fields. Traditional Orthotic Fabrication Method Utilizing Thermoplastic Resin, the Methodology for creating assistive devices using 3D scanner, commercial CAD software, and 3D printing technology, and the Fabrication Method of Arm Splint Based on XR (eXtended Reality) Algorithm. Objectives: The study recruited 12 undergraduate students majoring in physical therapy and occupational therapy who had sufficient knowledge of splints, with an equal gender distribution. The study randomized the participants and conducted the experiment and overall process using a stratified approach. Design: Clinical applied technology experiment Methods: The study used QUEST 2.0 (Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology ver. 2.0) to survey standardization, weight, ease of use, safety, durability, usability, effectiveness, and patient satisfaction, and statistically analyzed all results as quantitative indicators. Results: The score of QUEST 2.0 showed different aspects in some items, and it is difficult to say that certain technologies are superior overall. Conclusion: The study attempted an intuitive interpretation of the results. Overall, it was concluded that the XR method, which allows for easy and fast fabrication, is likely to be more readily accepted in future clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION
METHODS
    Study Design and Sequences
    Traditional Orthotic Fabrication Method UtilizingThermoplastic Resin
    Methodology for creating assistive devices using3D scanner, commercial CAD software, and 3Dprinting technology
    Fabrication Method of Arm Splint Based on XR(eXtended Reality) Algorithm
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION

• Myeongtaek Hong(Department of Occupational Therapy, Kyungbok University, Namuangju, Republic of Korea)
• Hyunyoung Lee(Department of Occupational Therapy, Kyungbok University, Namuangju, Republic of Korea)
• Seunghun Jeong(Department of Occupational Therapy, Kyungbok University, Namuangju, Republic of Korea)
• Seonwook Kim(Department of Occupational Therapy, Kyungbok University, Namuangju, Republic of Korea)
• Youmin Kim(Department of Occupational Therapy, Kyungbok University, Namuangju, Republic of Korea)
• Wansuk Choi, PT, Prof., PhD(Department of Physical Therapy, International University of Korea, Jinju, Republic of Korea)
• Seoyoon Heo, OT, ATP, PhD(Department of Occupational Therapy, Kyungbok University, Namuangju, Republic of Korea) Corresponding author