Khandwala A R, Webb J, Harris S B, Foster A J, Elliot D
Hand Surgery Department, St Andrew's Centre for Plastic Surgery, Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, UK.
J Hand Surg Br. 2000 Apr;25(2):140-6. doi: 10.1054/jhsb.1999.0356.
We present a prospective randomized trial of two groups of 50 patients each having complete zone 5 and 6 extensor tendon injuries. These were rehabilitated by the use of either a dynamic outrigger splint or a palmar blocking splint. The results were analysed using the Miller and TAM assessments. Good and excellent results were achieved in 95 and 98% of cases following dynamic outrigger mobilization and 93 and 95% of cases using palmar blocking splint mobilization, using the Miller and TAM assessments respectively. There was no statistical difference in the results obtained between the two groups. Therefore, we prefer the latter technique which is simple, cheap, more convenient and requires less therapy time.
我们开展了一项前瞻性随机试验，每组50例患者，均为完全性5区和6区伸肌腱损伤。分别使用动力性支具或掌侧阻挡支具对这些患者进行康复治疗。采用米勒（Miller）和总主动活动度（TAM）评估对结果进行分析。根据米勒评估和TAM评估，动力性支具活动后95%和98%的病例取得了良好和优异的结果，掌侧阻挡支具活动后93%和95%的病例取得了良好和优异的结果。两组获得的结果无统计学差异。因此，我们更倾向于后一种技术，它简单、便宜、更方便且所需治疗时间更少。
