Effects of blood flow restriction therapy on functional outcomes in patients with distal radius fracture: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Héctor Gutiérrez-Espinoza, Iván Cuyúl-Vásquez, Juan Valenzuela-Fuenzalida, Felipe Ponce-Fuentes, Javier Román-Veas, Felipe Araya-Quintanilla
{"title":"Effects of blood flow restriction therapy on functional outcomes in patients with distal radius fracture: A systematic review with meta-analysis.","authors":"Héctor Gutiérrez-Espinoza, Iván Cuyúl-Vásquez, Juan Valenzuela-Fuenzalida, Felipe Ponce-Fuentes, Javier Román-Veas, Felipe Araya-Quintanilla","doi":"10.1177/10538127261489858","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundNo previous systematic reviews have evaluated the effects of blood flow restriction therapy (BFRT) in addition to other therapeutic interventions on clinical outcomes in patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs).ObjectiveTo determine the clinical effects of BFRT on functional outcomes in patients with DRFs.MethodsAn electronic search was performed using the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, PEDro, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and LILACS databases. The eligibility criteria included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of BFRT with or without other therapeutic interventions on functional outcomes in patients with DRFs. Two authors independently performed the searches, study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Data were pooled using a Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects method or Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.ResultsFour RCTs met the eligibility criteria. For the comparison of BFRT plus standard rehabilitation versus standard rehabilitation alone, at four weeks and six to eight weeks, the overall mean difference (MD) for PRWE was -5.41 points (<i>p</i> = 0.39), DASH was 1.94 points (<i>p</i> = 0.84), grip strength was -2.47% (<i>p</i> = 0.66), pinch strength was 0.28 kg (<i>p</i> = 0.59), wrist flexion-extension range of motion was 4.30 degrees (<i>p</i> = 0.33), and VAS was 0.43 cm (<i>p</i> = 0.09).ConclusionsGiven the limited available evidence, the effectiveness of adding BFRT to standard rehabilitation remains uncertain. Preliminary findings suggest that BFRT did not improve any of the functional outcomes. More clinical trials, in both quantity and quality, are needed to confirm the clinical effects of BFRT in patients with DRFs.<b>PROSPERO registration:</b> CRD42021260589.</p>","PeriodicalId":15129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"10538127261489858"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10538127261489858","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundNo previous systematic reviews have evaluated the effects of blood flow restriction therapy (BFRT) in addition to other therapeutic interventions on clinical outcomes in patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs).ObjectiveTo determine the clinical effects of BFRT on functional outcomes in patients with DRFs.MethodsAn electronic search was performed using the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, PEDro, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and LILACS databases. The eligibility criteria included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of BFRT with or without other therapeutic interventions on functional outcomes in patients with DRFs. Two authors independently performed the searches, study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0. Data were pooled using a Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects method or Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.ResultsFour RCTs met the eligibility criteria. For the comparison of BFRT plus standard rehabilitation versus standard rehabilitation alone, at four weeks and six to eight weeks, the overall mean difference (MD) for PRWE was -5.41 points (p = 0.39), DASH was 1.94 points (p = 0.84), grip strength was -2.47% (p = 0.66), pinch strength was 0.28 kg (p = 0.59), wrist flexion-extension range of motion was 4.30 degrees (p = 0.33), and VAS was 0.43 cm (p = 0.09).ConclusionsGiven the limited available evidence, the effectiveness of adding BFRT to standard rehabilitation remains uncertain. Preliminary findings suggest that BFRT did not improve any of the functional outcomes. More clinical trials, in both quantity and quality, are needed to confirm the clinical effects of BFRT in patients with DRFs.PROSPERO registration: CRD42021260589.

限制血流治疗对桡骨远端骨折患者功能结局的影响:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景:之前没有系统的综述评估过限制血流治疗(BFRT)和其他治疗干预措施对桡骨远端骨折(DRFs)患者临床结果的影响。目的探讨BFRT对DRFs患者功能结局的临床影响。方法采用MEDLINE、CENTRAL、EMBASE、Web of Science、PEDro、CINAHL、SPORTDiscus、LILACS数据库进行电子检索。入选标准包括随机临床试验(rct),研究BFRT联合或不联合其他治疗干预对DRFs患者功能结局的影响。两位作者使用Cochrane risk of bias 2.0独立进行检索、研究选择、数据提取和偏倚风险评估。采用hartung - knap - sidik - jonkman随机效应方法或Mantel-Haenszel固定效应模型汇总数据。使用GRADE评估证据的确定性。结果4项rct符合入选标准。对于BFRT加标准康复与单独标准康复的比较,在4周和6 ~ 8周时,PRWE的总平均差值(MD)为-5.41分(p = 0.39), DASH为1.94分(p = 0.84),握力为-2.47% (p = 0.66),捏力为0.28 kg (p = 0.59),手腕屈伸活动范围为4.30度(p = 0.33), VAS为0.43 cm (p = 0.09)。鉴于现有证据有限,将BFRT加入标准康复的有效性仍不确定。初步结果表明,BFRT没有改善任何功能结果。在数量和质量上,还需要更多的临床试验来证实BFRT对DRFs患者的临床效果。普洛斯彼罗注册:CRD42021260589。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
194
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation is a journal whose main focus is to present relevant information about the interdisciplinary approach to musculoskeletal rehabilitation for clinicians who treat patients with back and musculoskeletal pain complaints. It will provide readers with both 1) a general fund of knowledge on the assessment and management of specific problems and 2) new information considered to be state-of-the-art in the field. The intended audience is multidisciplinary as well as multi-specialty. In each issue clinicians can find information which they can use in their patient setting the very next day.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书