在拇长伸肌修复后,动态伸展夹板或早期主动运动是否能提供更好的结果?系统回顾。

IF 0.6 Q4 REHABILITATION
Claire Brent, Nico Magni, Richard Ellis
{"title":"在拇长伸肌修复后,动态伸展夹板或早期主动运动是否能提供更好的结果?系统回顾。","authors":"Claire Brent, Nico Magni, Richard Ellis","doi":"10.1177/17589983251372843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":43971,"journal":{"name":"Hand Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"17589983251372843"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12420641/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does dynamic extension splinting or early active motion provide better outcomes post extensor pollicis longus repair? A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Claire Brent, Nico Magni, Richard Ellis\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17589983251372843\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43971,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hand Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17589983251372843\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12420641/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hand Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17589983251372843\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hand Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17589983251372843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:关于拇长伸肌(EPL)修复术(肌腱转移和直接修复)的术后处理研究有限。与静态铸造相比,早期主动运动(EAM)和动态扩展夹板(DES)变得越来越普遍。本系统综述的目的是确定EAM在EPL直接修复或肌腱转移后是否优于DES。结果包括活动范围、力量和不良事件。方法:系统检索AMED、EBSCO健康数据库(CINAHL、MEDLINE和SPORTDiscus)和Scopus。随机对照试验或队列研究,如果他们遵循EAM或DES康复方案,并评估EPL手术修复后的总主动运动、握力、捏力或活动范围。提取的数据包括手术过程、康复方案和结果。采用Downs和Black临床试验质量评估检查表评估方法学质量。结果:6项研究符合纳入标准。5项研究纳入DES, 2项研究纳入EAM。两种干预均可改善ROM、握力和捏紧力,但没有一种干预优于其他干预。使用EAM或DES没有增加不良结果。对纳入研究的方法学质量进行评估后,偏倚风险从好到差不等。讨论:EPL修复或肌腱转移后应考虑使用EAM。与DES相比,EAM在EPL修复后的结果并不优越,同样EAM也不逊于DES。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does dynamic extension splinting or early active motion provide better outcomes post extensor pollicis longus repair? A systematic review.

Introduction: 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.

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Discussion: 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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hand Therapy
Hand Therapy REHABILITATION-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
13
×
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