Brent Claire, Magni Nico, Ellis Richard
TBI Health, Wellington, New Zealand.
AUT Active Living and Rehabilitation Research Centre, Health and Rehabilitation Institute, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand.
Hand Ther. 2025 Sep 9:17589983251372843. doi: 10.1177/17589983251372843.
Limited research exists on the post-operative treatment of extensor pollicis longus (EPL) repair (tendon transfer and direct repair). Early active motion (EAM) and dynamic extension splinting (DES) are becoming more common compared to static casting. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether EAM was superior to DES post EPL direct repair or tendon transfer. Outcomes of interest included range of motion, strength, and adverse events.
A systematic search of AMED, EBSCO health database (CINAHL, MEDLINE, and SPORTDiscus), and Scopus was completed. Randomised control trials or cohort studies were included if they followed either an EAM or DES rehabilitation protocol and assessed total active motion, grip strength, pinch strength, or range of motion post EPL surgical repairs. Data extracted included the surgical procedure, rehabilitation protocols, and results. The Downs and Black checklist for clinical trial quality assessment was utilised to assess the methodological quality.
Six studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies included DES and two studies included EAM. Both interventions resulted in improvements in ROM, grip strength and pinch strength with neither intervention being superior. There was no increase in adverse outcomes by using EAM or DES. The risk of bias following assessment of methodological quality of included studies ranged from good to poor.
The use of EAM should be considered post EPL repair or tendon transfer. EAM does not result in superior outcomes post EPL repair compared to DES, equally EAM does not appear to be inferior compared to DES.
关于拇长伸肌(EPL)修复(肌腱转移和直接修复)术后治疗的研究有限。与静态石膏固定相比,早期主动活动(EAM)和动态伸展夹板固定(DES)正变得越来越普遍。本系统评价的目的是确定EPL直接修复或肌腱转移术后EAM是否优于DES。感兴趣的结果包括活动范围、力量和不良事件。
对AMED、EBSCO健康数据库(CINAHL、MEDLINE和SPORTDiscus)以及Scopus进行了系统检索。如果随机对照试验或队列研究遵循EAM或DES康复方案,并评估EPL手术修复后的总主动活动、握力、捏力或活动范围,则纳入研究。提取的数据包括手术过程、康复方案和结果。采用唐斯和布莱克临床试验质量评估清单来评估方法学质量。
六项研究符合纳入标准。五项研究包括DES,两项研究包括EAM。两种干预措施均使活动范围、握力和捏力得到改善,且两种干预措施均无优势。使用EAM或DES均未增加不良后果。对纳入研究的方法学质量进行评估后,偏倚风险从良好到较差不等。
EPL修复或肌腱转移术后应考虑使用EAM。与DES相比,EPL修复后使用EAM不会产生更好的结果,同样,与DES相比,EAM似乎也不差。