Suppr超能文献

创伤后肘关节僵硬的静态渐进性夹板与动态夹板治疗:对232例患者的系统评价

Static progressive versus dynamic splinting for posttraumatic elbow stiffness: a systematic review of 232 patients.

作者信息

Veltman Ewout S, Doornberg Job N, Eygendaal Denise, van den Bekerom Michel P J

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spaarne hospital, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands,

出版信息

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015 May;135(5):613-7. doi: 10.1007/s00402-015-2199-5. Epub 2015 Mar 13.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The elbow is prone to stiffness after trauma. To regain functional elbow motion, several conservative and surgical treatment options are available. Nonoperative treatment includes physical therapy, intra-articular injections with corticosteroids, and a static progressive or dynamic splinting program. The objective of this study was to perform a comprehensive review of the literature to evaluate the best current evidence for nonoperative treatment options for posttraumatic elbow stiffness.

METHODS

We performed a search of all studies on nonoperative treatment for elbow stiffness in human adults. All articles describing nonoperative treatment of elbow stiffness, written in the English, German, French or Dutch language, including human adult patients and with the functional outcome reported were included in this study.

RESULTS

Eight studies (including 232 patients) met our eligibility criteria and were included for data analysis and pooling. These studies included one randomized controlled trial and seven retrospective cohort studies. Static progressive splinting was evaluated in 160 patients. The average pre-splinting range of motion of all elbows was 72°, which improved by 36° after splinting to an average post-splinting arc of motion of 108°. Dynamic splinting was evaluated in 72 patients with an average pre-splinting range of motion of 63°. The average improvement was 37° to an average post-splinting arc of motion of 100°.

CONCLUSIONS

Both dynamic orthoses and static progressive splinting show good results for the treatment of elbow stiffness, regardless of etiology. The choice for one treatment over the other is based on the preference of the surgeon and patient. We recommend to continue nonoperative treatment with dynamic or static bracing for 12 months or until patients stop making progression in range of elbow motion.

摘要

引言

肘部创伤后容易出现僵硬。为恢复肘部的功能活动度,有多种保守和手术治疗方案可供选择。非手术治疗包括物理治疗、关节内注射皮质类固醇以及静态渐进性或动态夹板固定方案。本研究的目的是对文献进行全面综述,以评估创伤后肘部僵硬非手术治疗方案的当前最佳证据。

方法

我们检索了所有关于成人肘部僵硬非手术治疗的研究。所有用英语、德语、法语或荷兰语撰写的、描述肘部僵硬非手术治疗、纳入成人患者并报告功能结局的文章均纳入本研究。

结果

八项研究(包括232例患者)符合我们的纳入标准,被纳入数据分析和汇总。这些研究包括一项随机对照试验和七项回顾性队列研究。160例患者接受了静态渐进性夹板固定评估。所有肘部夹板固定前的平均活动度为72°,夹板固定后改善了36°,平均夹板固定后的活动弧度为108°。72例患者接受了动态夹板固定评估,夹板固定前的平均活动度为63°。平均改善了37°,平均夹板固定后的活动弧度为100°。

结论

无论病因如何,动态矫形器和静态渐进性夹板固定在治疗肘部僵硬方面均显示出良好效果。选择一种治疗方法而非另一种基于外科医生和患者的偏好。我们建议继续采用动态或静态支具进行非手术治疗12个月,或直至患者肘部活动度不再进展。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验