Effectiveness of bracing in the treatment of nonosseous restriction of elbow mobility: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 studies

Effectiveness of the static progressive Joint Active System splint in improving upper extremity joint stiffness

PURPOSE

Injuries to the upper extremity often result in stiffness. The joint capsule may lose its elastic properties, limiting motion. Most modalities for increasing motion are based on capsule stretching, and usually involve physical or occupational therapy. We tested the hypothesis that the Joint Active System static-progressive splint is helpful in increasing range of motion in stiff joints after failure of other treatments.

METHODS

Candidates for the Joint Active System splint were mostly patients with upper extremity trauma that required surgery, if they plateaued after therapy but still had stiffness. A retrospective review was performed of all patients from 2015 to 2019 that met our inclusion criteria. Etiologies of stiffness and patient demographics were documented. Range of motion was recorded before and after treatment and, when available, functional scores were calculated.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were treated with the Joint Active System splint; 5 were excluded, leaving 39 for analysis: 15 elbow, 14 wrist and 10 proximal interphalangeal joints. All patients had received therapy before using the Joint Active System and 11 had tried a dynamic splint in addition to therapy. All joints showed significant improvement in motion after treatment: from 66.5° to 95.7° in the elbow, 63.5° to 81.1° in the wrist and 33.2° to 51.8° in the proximal interphalangeal joint. When functional scores were available before and after treatment, there was significant improvement for both elbow and wrist. Even when the Joint Active System was started many months after injury, it was effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite reaching a plateau with therapy, the Joint Active System static-progressive splint is effective in improving range of motion in elbow, wrist and finger joints with stiffness following injury or surgery.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective case series.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, level IV.

Anxiety and depression are associated with poor outcomes in open elbow arthrolysis

BACKGROUND

Open elbow arthrolysis (OEA) is an established treatment for posttraumatic elbow stiffness (PTES); however, its efficacy is debatable for some patients. Poor surgical outcomes have been associated with anxiety and depression in other orthopedic conditions, but no studies have examined this association in OEA. In this study, we aimed to determine whether a high preoperative anxiety and depression score is associated with a worse functional outcome in OEA for PTES.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was carried out in patients undergoing OEA between April 2021 and March 2022. Mental state evaluated by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), subjective elbow function valued by Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, objective elbow function valued by Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), pain score measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and the flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) of the affected elbow were collected before and after surgery in outpatient clinic follow-up at 3 months and 6 months. Patient satisfaction was only recorded 6 months postoperatively. All patients were divided into 2 groups based on the preoperative HADS score for analysis: Group A was the nonanxiety-depression group, and Group B was the anxiety-depression group.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients were included. Both groups improved in DASH, MEPS and ROM at 3 months and at 6 months. The HADS score in Group B decreased significantly at 6 months, showing that the mental state of patients in Group B improved after surgery. Group A had a lower DASH at 3 months and 6 months, larger 6-month ROM and higher satisfaction rate than Group B. Comparing the differences between preoperative and postoperative measurements, Group A improved more in ROM at 6 months. There was no significant difference in other outcome measures between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

OEA is a safe and effective treatment for PTES, and can achieve good clinical outcomes in the short-term follow-up, regardless of whether the patients suffer from anxiety or depression. Patients with a HADS score ≥11 before OEA, however, have worse outcomes than those with a HADS score <11.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II; Retrospective Design; Prognosis Study.

A modified-delphi study establishing consensus in the therapeutic management of posttrauamtic elbow stiffness

STUDY DESIGN

Web-based modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND

Therapy is widely considered the first choice of treatment for posttraumatic stiffness of the elbow since loss of motion is a common sequela following traumatic elbow injuries. There is high variability in practice patterns for the management of the posttraumtic elbow.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to identify the current therapeutic management of posttraumatic elbow stiffness using expert consensus.

METHODS

This study surveyed experts using a web-based 3 round modified Delphi method. Quantitative data and comments were collected during the first round. Questions with Likert scaling were used to identify consensus (defined as 75% agreement) with each statement and comment boxes enabled open-ended responses to gather expert opinion. Lack of consensus and data from comments guided the second-round of the survey. This process was repeated after Round 2 to develop the Round 3 survey. Consensus was achieved at Round 3 and no further rounds were needed.

RESULTS

Round 1 included 34 experts (response rate 20%), not all experts were able to continue through all rounds. Round 2 included 18 experts and Round 3 included 15 experts. Survey items were categorized as follows: examination procedures, therapeutic interventions, orthotic intervention considerations, contributing patient factors, and clinical decisions and rehabilitation challenges. Twenty-five percent of items achieved consensus after Round 1, 30% after Round 2 and 52% after Round 3. Although most participants agreed that orthotic intervention is critical to patient outcomes, there were conflicting thoughts about the orthotic design and wearing schedule.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this web-based modified Delphi study helped to establish a current body of knowledge using expert consensus to guide practice and identify specific questions that can be studied in future clinical studies on posttraumatic elbow stiffness.

Distal and/or Proximal Joint Stiffness Among Post-Fracture Patients Treated in University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Gondar, Ethiopia

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

REVIEW OF ARTICULATED ELBOW ORTHOTICS FOR JOINT STIFFNESS REHABILITATION

ABSTRACT Joint stiffness is the most common complication in elbow injuries, presenting several etiologies and pathophysiological mechanisms that hinder treatment and prognosis. Prevention and treatment of joint contracture depend on the cause of stiffness, and early intervention should modify its outcomes. The methods used may be conservative or surgical, alone or in combination, according to each individual situation. Objective: Review articles on articulated elbow orthosis for joint stiffness rehabilitation. Methods: A literature review was conducted in journals available at the PubMed, Medline and LILACS databases, using the following Health Science Descriptors (DeCS): orthotic devices; braces; elbow; elbow joint; contracture; joint disorders. It sought to retrieve and analyze studies with the highest level of evidence that have already been conducted on articulated elbow orthosis for joint stiffness rehabilitation. Results: After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, four articles were included from PubMed and none from Medline or LILACS. Of the four PubMed articles, two were systematic reviews and two were randomized clinical trials. Conclusion: Articulated elbow orthoses can benefit joint stiffness treatment, improving range of motion and pain, showing superior effect compared to non-articulated plaster orthotics. Level of Evidence III, Systematic Review of Level III Studies.

Mobilizing orthoses in the management of post-traumatic elbow contractures: A survey of Australian hand therapy practice

STUDY DESIGN

Mixed-methods survey.

INTRODUCTION

Elbow stiffness and contractures often develop after trauma. There is a lack of evidence on mobilizing orthoses and the factors guiding orthotic prescription.

PURPOSE OF STUDY

To investigate hand therapists' orthotic preferences for varying extension and flexion deficits, and describe the factors affecting orthotic choice for post-traumatic elbow contractures.

METHODS

103 members responded to the electronic survey via the Australian Hand Therapy Association mailing list. Five post-surgical scenarios were used to gather information regarding orthotic preferences, reasons and orthotic protocol: (1) week 8 with 55° extension deficit; (2) week 12 with 30° extension deficit; (3) week 12 with 55° extension deficit; (4) week 8 with flexion limited to 100°; (5) week 12 with limited flexion.

RESULTS

Most responders (89.9%) used mobilizing orthoses, predominantly for extension (88.5%). Orthotic preferences for scenarios 1 to 5 were (1) serial static (78.3%); (2) custom-made three-point static progressive (38.8%); (3) custom-made turnbuckle static progressive (33.8%); (4) "no orthosis" (27.9%); and (5) custom-made hinged (27.1%) and nonhinged (27.1%) dynamic. Choices were based on "effectiveness," "ease for patients to apply and wear," and "ease of fabrication/previous experience/comfortable with design." The recommended daily dosage for extension was 6 to 12 hour.

DISCUSSION

This is the first known study that reflects on the use of mobilizing orthoses in post-traumatic elbows in Australia.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobilizing orthoses are used routinely for post-traumatic elbows in Australia. Extension deficits are managed with serial static and static progressive orthoses at weeks 8 and 12, respectively. Research is needed to assess whether orthotic intervention before 12 weeks is beneficial in reducing contractures.

Printing a static progressive orthosis for hand rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Static progressive orthosis is used for the treatment of severe joint contracture after trauma and/or surgery. However, a custom-fabricated static progressive splint would be expensive and labor intensive. Especially, owing to very limited payment under the current Taiwanese National Health Insurance, the incentives to fabricate a patient-specific splint are insufficient for a therapist. To ease splint construction, we introduced three-dimensional (3D)-printed "shark fin"-shaped device works as a static progressive orthosis for the hand rehabilitation. The aim of this study was to describe and demonstrate the newly designed device.

METHODS

This study included a 46-year male suffered from a left distal radius fracture and underwent open reduction internal fixation and a 23-year male with the right thumb flexor pollicis longus rupture, requiring tendon repair. Both subjects used this "shark fin"-shaped device to stretch for increasing range of motion (ROM) of wrist extension and the thumb.

RESULTS

The patient receiving ulnar shortening surgery used this device to stretch for increasing ROM of wrist extension. The active ROM of wrist extension improved from 30° to 50°. The other patient with the right thumb flexor pollicis longus rupture suffered from thumb contracture; the ROMs of the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint and interphalangeal (IP) joint were 40°-55° and 20°-25°, respectively. After tenolysis surgery, his ROMs of the MCP and IP joints were improved to 10°-35° and 40°-65°, respectively. Following physical therapy by applying the device, his ROMs of the MCP and IP joints were further increased to 0°-40° and 25°-70°, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating the "shark fin"-shaped orthosis into hand rehabilitation increased the ROM of wrist extension for a patient with distal radius fracture and improved the ROM of the MCP and IP joints in another patient after tenolysis surgery.

Risk Factors of Elbow Stiffness After Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of the Terrible Triad of the Elbow Joint

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the risk factors of elbow stiffness following open reduction and internal fixation of the terrible triad of the elbow joint.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of 100 patients with the terrible triad of the elbow joint, who had been treated at our hospital from January 2015 to December 2018. All patients were treated with a loop plate to repair the ulnar coronoid process. According to the severity of the injury, the radial head was either fixed or replaced, and the lateral collateral ligament was repaired with an anchor. According to the range of motion of the elbow during the last follow-up, the patients were divided into two groups. The stiffness group (displayed extension-flexion or pronation-supination <100°) consisted of 30 patients. The second group, named the non-stiffness group (exhibited extension-flexion and pronation-supination ≥100°), consisted of 70 patients. Related risk factors included age, gender, smoking, diabetes, whether the fracture is on the dominant side, mechanism of injury, fracture classification, time from injury to surgery, configuration of internal fixation of the radial head, postoperative immobilization time, and use of anti-heterotopic ossification drugs (oral indomethacin). Both t-test and chi squared test were used to analyze any significant differences. Only the variables with a P < 0.05 in the tests were retested into a logistic multiple regression in order to screen risk factors of elbow stiffness.

RESULTS

All patients were followed up for 12-48 months (average, 25.7 months), and all patients exhibited bone healing. Multivariate regression analysis showed that high-energy injury (OR = 3.068, 95% CI 1.134-8.295, P = 0.027), time from injury to surgery > 1 week (OR = 2.714, 95% CI 1.029-7.159, P = 0.044), and postoperative immobilization time (OR = 3.237, 95% CI 1.176-8.908, P = 0.023) were independent risk factors of elbow stiffness after surgery for the terrible triad of the elbow.

CONCLUSION

High-energy injury, the time from injury to surgery > 1 week, and postoperative joint immobilization time > 2 weeks are the independent risk factors of elbow stiffness after surgery of the terrible triad of the elbow, which should be treated carefully in clinical treatment.

Surgical Treatment of Post-traumatic Elbow Stiffness by Wide Posterior Approach

Objective  To demonstrate the clinical outcomes and complication rates of the surgical release with a single posterior approach in the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness. Methods  A prospective study with patients submitted to surgery between May 2013 and June 2018 in a single center. The access to the elbow was made through the posterior approach. The patients were followed up by an occupational therapy team, and were submitted to a standardized rehabilitation protocol, with static progressive orthoses and dynamic orthoses. The primary outcome was the range of flexion-extension of the elbow after 6 months. Results  A total of 26 patients completed the minimum follow-up of 6-months. The mean range of flexion-extension of the elbow at the end of 6 months was of 98.3 ± 22.0°, with an amplitude gain of 40.0 ± 14.0° in relation to the pre-operative period ( p  < 0.001). The average flexion-extension gain at the end of 6 months was of 51.7% ± 17.1% ( p  < 0.001). The mean pronosupination at the end of 6 months was of 129.0 ± 42.7° ( p  < 0.001). Half of the cases had moderate and severe stiffness in the pre-operative period, compared with 7.7% at 6 months post-operatively ( p  < 0.001). The mean score for the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) instruments was 74.4 ± 16.8 points and 31.7 ± 21.9 points respectively ( p  < 0.001 for both). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score presented no statistically significant difference compared to the pre-operative period ( p  = 0.096). Complications were observed in 6 (23%) patients, and no new surgical procedures were necessary. Conclusions  The surgical release of the elbow associated with a rehabilitation protocol is a safe technique, with satisfactory results and low rate of complications.

Randomized trial for the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness: surgical release vs. rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

There are no previous randomized trials comparing surgical to conservative treatment for post-traumatic elbow stiffness. The aim of our study was to compare elbow range of motion (ROM) and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing surgical treatment or a standardized rehabilitation for post-traumatic elbow stiffness.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trial of patients with post-traumatic elbow stiffness for more than 6 months who failed conventional physical therapy for 4 months. Patients were randomized into 2 treatment groups. The conservative group underwent the rehabilitation protocol associated with the use of orthoses (static progressive for extension and dynamic for flexion) and continuous passive motion. The surgical group underwent surgical release by a posterior approach without triceps detachment, followed by a rehabilitation protocol similar to the conservative group. The primary outcome of the study was flexion-extension ROM at 6 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the visual analog scale for pain, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score, absolute and relative increase in flexion-extension ROM, and complication rates.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were analyzed in the study, 15 in each group. The mean elbow flexion-extension ROM at the end of 6 months of follow-up was 108° in the surgical group and 88° in the conservative group (P = .002). The mean absolute and the relative increase of elbow flexion-extension at 6 months were, respectively, 17° and 27% in the conservative group and 41° and 59% in the surgical group (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Surgical elbow release associated with the rehabilitation protocol resulted in a greater flexion-extension ROM, as well as a greater absolute and relative increase compared with rehabilitation alone at 6 months of follow-up. The groups did not differ regarding clinical scores and complication rates.

[Not a Chronic Tennis Elbow]

Not a Chronic Tennis Elbow Abstract. Lateral elbow pain is a highly unspecific finding and may be caused by one of several possible differential diagnoses. Unfortunately, it is often assumed to be epicondylitis, commonly referred to as tennis elbow, although instability is a frequent cause in chronic cases. In the presented case, it is the less frequent nerve compression of the radial nerve which must also be considered, together with plica syndrome, osteochondritis dissecans and arthrosis of the radiocapitellar joint, as a differential diagnosis of lateral elbow pain.

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness: Pathogenesis and current treatments

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is a major cause of functional impairment after elbow trauma. A stiff elbow limits patients' ability to position their hand in space for optimal use of their upper extremities, and as such, is a frequent indication for reoperation. This article reviews current concepts on the pathogenesis of post-traumatic elbow stiffness. Current nonoperative treatment options include therapy, bracing, and manipulation under anesthesia, while operative treatment options include arthroscopic and open arthrolysis. The pros and cons of various treatment options are discussed, with a focus on the evidence supporting their use, the expected functional gains, and associated complications. Future directions in post-traumatic elbow stiffness are highlighted.

Static progressive stretch orthosis-consensus modality to treat knee stiffness-rationale and literature review

The current literature supports static progressive stretch (SPS) orthoses as the consensus modality to treat joint stiffness as an adjunct to manual therapy. Over 50 published studies prove the efficacy and safety of this modality as an adjunct to therapy to improve range of motion (ROM) as well as decrease stiffness and pain. Data from a large prospective study on SPS effectiveness identified a 90% improvement in ROM, 84% reduction in stiffness and swelling, 70% reduction in pain, and no reports of complications or injury. Another 13 studies evaluating patients with knee stiffness have shown excellent results with SPS, and a reduced need for manipulation under anesthesia or additional surgeries. The bidirectional SPS device allows for ROM therapy in both flexion and extension, uses short, 5-minute incremental stretches for up to a 30-minute session applied 1 to 3 times per day for 8 weeks, though treatment might be needed for longer durations (8 to 12 weeks) in cases with chronic stiffness/contracture, to improve motion and significantly reduces need for manipulation or surgery for treatment of knee fibrosis. Earlier application of SPS therapy, even immediately postoperative following corrective surgery for motion loss, can greatly improve the results for patients who have limitations in knee motion.

Effects of muscle energy technique on pain, range of motion and function in patients with post-surgical elbow stiffness: A randomized controlled trial

Background:

Elbow is a very functional joint. Elbow stiffness is a significant cause of disability hampering the function of the upper extremity as a whole. Muscle Energy Techniques (METs) are relatively pain-free techniques used in clinical practice for restricted range of motion (ROM).

Objective:

To study the effects of MET on pain, ROM and function given early in the rehabilitation in post-surgical elbow stiffness.

Methods:

An RCT was conducted on 30 patients post elbow fracture fixation. Group 1 was given MET immediately post removal of immobilization while Group 2 received MET 1 week later along with the rehabilitation protocol. Pain (Visual Analogue Scale), ROM (goniometry) and function (Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) were assessed pre and post 3 weeks.

Results:

Group 1 showed greater improvement than Group 2, mean flexion and extension change between groups being 11.7±2.8, 95%CI(5.9,17.4) and 8.5±2.0, 95%CI(4.4,12.7), respectively. VAS and DASH scores improved better in Group 1, mean change being 1.2±0.2, 95%CI(0.6,1.8) and 18.2±2.2, 95%CI(13.5,22.8) for VAS and DASH scores, respectively.

Conclusion:

MET can be used as an adjunct to the rehabilitation protocol to treat elbow stiffness and can be given safely in the early stages of post elbow fracture rehabilitation managed surgically with open reduction and rigid internal fixation.

Post-traumatic stiff elbow

Post-traumatic and post-operative stiffness of the elbow joint is relatively common and may in pronounced cases markedly interfere with normal upper extremity function.Soft-tissue contractures and heterotopic bone formation are two major causes of limited movement.Extensive recent research has elucidated many of the pathways contributing to these conditions, but the exact mechanisms are still unknown.In the early phase of soft-tissue contractures conservative treatment may be valuable, but in longstanding cases operative treatment is often necessary.Several different options are available depending on the severity of the condition and the underlying offending structures. Surgical treatment may allow significant gains in movement but rarely complete restoration, and complications are not uncommon.The following presentation reviews the recent literature on pathomechanisms and treatment alternatives. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170062.

Open surgical elbow contracture release after trauma: results and recommendations

BACKGROUND

Post-traumatic elbow contracture is a debilitating complication after elbow trauma. The purpose of this study was to characterize the affected patient population, operative management, and outcomes after operative elbow contracture release for treatment of post-traumatic elbow contracture.

METHODS

A retrospective record review was conducted to identify all patients who underwent post-traumatic elbow contracture release performed by 1 of 3 surgeons at one academic medical center. Patient demographics, injuries, operative details, outcomes, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

The study included 103 patients who met inclusion criteria. At the time of contracture release, patients were a mean age of 45.2 ± 15.6 years. Contracture release resulted in a significant mean increase to elbow extension/flexion arc of motion of 52° ± 18° (P < .0005). Not including recurrence of contracture, a subsequent complication occurred in 10 patients (10%). Radiographic recurrence of heterotopic ossification (HO) occurred in 14 patients (14%) after release. Ten patients (11%) elected to undergo a secondary operation to gain more motion.

CONCLUSION

Soft tissue and bony elbow contracture release is effective. Patients with post-traumatic elbow contracture can make significant gains to their arc of motion after contracture release surgery and can expect to recover a functional elbow arc of motion. Patients with severe preoperative contracture may benefit from concomitant ulnar nerve decompression. HO prophylaxis did not affect the rate of HO recurrence or ultimate elbow range of motion. However, patients must be counseled that contracture may reoccur, and some patients may require or elect to have more than one procedure to achieve functional motion.

Static Progressive Orthoses for Elbow Contracture: A Systematic Review

Background

As one of the most common musculoskeletal complications following trauma, elbow contracture is a frequent source of disabled daily activities. Conventional interventions are inadequate to provide favorable outcome. The static progressive orthoses are getting popular in the treatment of this problem.

Objective

The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of static progressive orthoses for elbow contracture.

Methods

Literatures when written in English published during 1 January 1997 and 31 January 2017 were searched in the following databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EBSCOhost. Articles are quality-assessed by two assessors, each article was summarized in evidence tables, and a narrative synthesis was also performed.

Results

Ten clinical trials were included. The study design and outcome measures used varied. Significant immediate improvement in the range of motion was reported by all studies, and those effects were still significant at follow-up. No significant difference was shown between static progressive and dynamic orthoses for elbow contracture in one randomized control trial.

Conclusions

Current low-quality evidence suggested that static progressive orthoses provided assistance for elbow contracture through improving range of motion. Further research is recommended using high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Posttraumatic stiff elbow

Posttraumatic stiff elbow is a frequent and disabling complication and poses serious challenges for its management. In this review forty studies were included to know about the magnitude of the problem, causes, pathology, prevention, and treatment of posttraumatic stiff elbow. These studies show that simple measures such as internal fixation, immobilization in extension, and early motion of elbow joint are the most important steps that can prevent elbow stiffness. It also supports conservative treatment in selected cases. There are no clear guidelines about the choice between the numerous procedures described in literature. However, this review article disproves two major beliefs-heterotopic ossification is a bad prognostic feature, and passive mobilization of elbow causes elbow stiffness.

[Not Available]

Zusammenfassung. Obwohl der laterale Ellbogenschmerz viele mögliche Ursachen hat, wird er immer noch zu oft reflexartig mit dem Tennisarm gleichgesetzt. Zwei aktuelle Studien zeigen jedoch, dass 75 % der Patienten mit chronischem, lateralem Ellbogenschmerz unter einer Ellbogeninstabilität und nicht einem Tennisarm leiden. Der vorliegende Mini-Review soll die wichtigsten Differenzialdiagnosen des lateralen Ellbogenschmerzes in Ursache, Diagnostik, Behandlungsansatz sowie «pitfalls» und «red flags» beleuchten.

Conservative management of the post-traumatic stiff elbow: a physiotherapist's perspective

Elbow stiffness is a common consequence following trauma with the management of this condition posing a challenge to therapists and surgeons alike. This paper discusses the role of conservative treatment, such as exercise and splinting, in the prevention and management of the stiff elbow, along with a review of available evidence, to justify their usage.

Open surgical release for contractures of the elbow

Compared with arthroscopic release, open release is more commonly used for the treatment of stiff elbow. Flexion is recovered by releasing posterior tethering soft-tissue structures and by removing anterior impingement between the coronoid and/or radial head and the distal humerus. Extension is improved by releasing anterior soft-tissue tethers and by removing impingement between the olecranon tip and the olecranon fossa. Open elbow release is most commonly performed via ligament-sparing approaches. Ulnar nerve identification and transposition is recommended in the presence of nerve dysfunction or when correction of significant loss of elbow flexion is anticipated. Long-term improvement in flexion and extension can be expected with proper patient selection. Less predictable results are obtained in adolescent patients and in those with underlying traumatic brain injury.

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

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.

Use of nerve elongator to repair short-distance peripheral nerve defects: a prospective randomized study

Repair techniques for short-distance peripheral nerve defects, including adjacent joint flexion to reduce the distance between the nerve stump defects, "nerve splint" suturing, and nerve sleeve connection, have some disadvantages. Therefore, we designed a repair technique involving intraoperative tension-free application of a nerve elongator and obtained good outcomes in the repair of short-distance peripheral nerve defects in a previous animal study. The present study compared the clinical outcomes between the use of this nerve elongator and performance of the conventional method in the repair of short-distance transection injuries in human elbows. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month postoperative follow-up results demonstrated that early neurological function recovery was better in the nerve elongation group than in the conventional group, but no significant difference in long-term neurological function recovery was detected between the two groups. In the nerve elongation group, the nerves were sutured without tension, and the duration of postoperative immobilization of the elbow was decreased. Elbow function rehabilitation was significantly better in the nerve elongation group than in the control group. Moreover, there were no security risks. The results of this study confirm that the use of this nerve elongator for repair of short-distance peripheral nerve defects is safe and effective.

The use of braces in the rehabilitation treatment of the post-traumatic elbow

The elbow, the middle joint of the upper limb, enables the hand to be placed at various distances from the body. The articular, muscular and neuromotor complexity of the elbow is such that it is often prone to stiffness, especially if immobilized for long periods of time. Therefore, mobilization of the posttraumatic elbow must be started early. In the presence of lesions to the ligamentous structures, the joint must be protected to prevent these structures from being placed under tension during movement. Rehabilitation of the elbow includes the use of braces. Different types of brace are used depending on clinical situation and the objectives to be achieved. They can have fixed protection or locked articulation, allow an adjustable range of movement to restrict flexion-extension and pronation-supination, or allow dynamic and static progressive movement. The latter plays a special role in conservative treatment and following surgical release. However, the effectiveness of braces in the rehabilitation treatment of elbow stiffness depends on the patient's compliance. Their use requires a considerable amount of physician time to achieve the objectives envisaged by the rehabilitation program.