Early mobilisation versus plaster immobilisation of simple elbow dislocations: results of the FuncSiE multicentre randomised clinical trial

Stabilizing effect of an elbow orthosis with an adjustable hinge axis after lateral collateral ligament injury: A biomechanical study

Background

Current commercial elbow braces have a straight hinge that does not account for the native carrying angle of the elbow. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a custom-designed hinged elbow orthosis (HEO) with variable valgus angulations in stabilizing a lateral collateral ligament (LCL) deficient elbow.

Methods

Eight cadaveric upper extremities were mounted in an elbow motion simulator in the abducted varus gravity-loaded position. The specimens were examined before and after simulated LCL injury and then with the addition of the custom-designed HEO with 0°, 10°, and 20° of valgus angulation. Kinematic data were recorded using an electromagnetic tracking system.

Results

The LCL injured state with or without the brace resulted in significant increases in varus angulation of the elbow compared to the intact state in both pronation and supination (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in varus-valgus angulation or ulnohumeral rotation between any of the brace angles and the LCL injured state with the forearm pronated and supinated.

Discussion

The custom-designed HEO did not provide any additional stability to the LCL injured elbow. The varus arm position should be avoided during the rehabilitation of an LCL injured elbow even when an HEO is used.

Simple acute postero-lateral elbow dislocation: A historical perspective

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to summarize (1) the historical knowledge of the posterolateral elbow dislocation (PLED) pattern and the biomechanical, radiographic, and clinical data that engendered its evolution; and (2) to help clinicians better understand the management of PLED.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using Ovid, Scopus and Cochrane Library, and the Medical Subject Headings vocabulary. Results are discussed as a chronologic review of the relevant literature between 1920-2022.

RESULTS

In 1966 Osborn and Cotterill were the first to describe posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) causing the PLED. Several theories on PLED were then published by others surgeons as our understanding of elbow biomechanics continued to improve. Multiple treatment protocols have been designed based on the aforementioned theories. Conservative and surgical treatment for PLED provides excellent functional outcomes. However, high rates of persistent pain stiffness and instability have been reported long-term, and no single approach to treatment has been widely accepted.

CONCLUSION

Despite a growing body of biomechanical evidence, there is no consensus surgical indication for the treatment of PLED. Both conservative and surgical management result in satisfactory functional outcomes after PLED. However, elevated rates of residual pain, and instability have also been described and may limit heavy labor and sports participation. The next challenge for elbow surgeons will be to identify those patients who would benefit from surgical stabilization following PLED.

Treatment strategies for simple elbow dislocation - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Current treatment concepts for simple elbow dislocation involve conservative and surgical approaches. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the superiority of one treatment strategy over the other by a qualitative analysis in adult patients who suffered simple elbow luxation.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and following the suggestions for reporting on qualitative summaries was performed. A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus, including variations and combinations of the following keywords: elbow, radiohumeral, ulnohumeral, radioulnar, luxation, and therapy. Seventeen studies that performed a randomized controlled trial to compare treatment strategies as conservative or surgical procedures were included. Reviews are not selected for further qualitative analysis. The following outcome parameters were compared: range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure (Quick-DASH), recurrent instability, pain measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and time to return to work (RW).

RESULTS

Early mobilization after conservative treatment strategies showed improved ROM compared to immobilization for up to 3 weeks after surgery with less extension deficit in the early mobilization group (16° ± 13°. vs. 19.5° ± 3°, p < 0.05), as well as excellent clinical outcome scores. Surgical approaches showed similar results compared to conservative treatment, leading to improved ROM (115 vs. 118 ± 2.8) and MEPS: 95 ± 7 vs. 92 ± 4.

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment with early functional training of the elbow remains the first-line therapy for simple elbow dislocation. The surgical procedure provides similar outcomes compared to conservative treatment regarding MEPS and ROM for patients with slight initial instability in physical examination and radiographs. People with red flags for persistent instability, such as severe bilateral ligament injuries and moderate to severe instability during initial physical examination, should be considered for a primary surgical approach to prevent recurrent posterolateral and valgus instability. Postoperative early mobilization and early mobilization for conservatively treated patients is beneficial to improve patient outcome and ROM.

Does plate position influence the outcome in midshaft clavicular fractures? A multicenter analysis

PURPOSE

To date, it remains unclear whether superior or anterior plating is the best option for treating midshaft clavicular fractures. The aim of this study was to compare both techniques with regard to the incidence of implant removal due to implant irritation, risk of complications, time to union, and function.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, all midshaft clavicular fractures treated operatively between 2017 and 2020 in two hospitals in Switzerland were analyzed. The participating hospitals differed with regard to their standard practice; one offered superior plating only, while the other predominantly employed an anterior plate. The primary outcome was the incidence of implant removal for irritation. Secondary outcomes were time to union, complications, re-interventions, and range of motion during the follow-up period of at least 6 months.

RESULTS

In total, 168 patients were included in the study of which 81 (48%) received anterior plating and 87 (52%) superior plating. The overall mean age was 45 years (SD 16). There was no significant difference between anterior and superior plating with regard to implant removal (58.5% versus 57.1%, p = 0.887), infection (5.7% versus 1.8%, p = 0.071), and time to union (median 48 weeks versus 52 weeks, p = 0.643). Data on range of motion were available in 71 patients. There was no significant difference in anteflexion (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) and abduction (median 180 degrees anterior versus 180 degrees superior) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective cohort study did not find sufficient evidence to recommend one implant position over the other for midshaft clavicular fractures with regard to removal due to irritation. Time to union was similar and Infections were equally rare in both groups. Notably, a considerable number of patients in both groups had their implants removed due to irritation. Larger prospective studies are needed to determine how much plate position contributes to the occurrence of irritation and whether other patient or implant-related factors might play a role. Until this is clarified, implant position should be based on surgeons preference and experience.

Persistent elbow dislocation

Acute elbow dislocation is a common injury with an incidence in the general population estimated at around 5/100,000. Persistent (or static) elbow dislocation is a relatively rare problem but might occur due to inappropriate assessment or treatment of acute simple or complex elbow dislocations. Persistent elbow dislocation can be an invalidating and painful condition with a more ominous prognosis than an acute elbow dislocation with appropriate treatment. Surgical treatment of persistent elbow dislocation is a complex intervention that requires extended surgical exposure and arthrolysis in combination with circumferential ligamentous and osseous stabilization. Satisfactory results are described, but complication and reintervention rates are high. After-treatment with a dynamic external fixator is often necessary.

Acute elbow dislocation: a critical appraisal of the literature

Background

The purpose of this study was to perform a narrative review of acute elbow dislocation (AED). There are certain aspects of the management of AED that are controversial, including type and length of immobilization, indications for surgery, type of surgery, and new evidence available.

Material and methods

A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and Embase databases for studies regarding AED. Preference was given to studies according to their level of evidence. Studies regarding the outcome of conservative and surgical treatment, including patient-reported outcomes, complications, and conversion to stabilization or revision surgery were included.

Results

We found only 1 level I study and 3 level II randomized clinical trials. The rest consisted of level III-V evidence. Conservative care continues to be the standard of care for stable AEDs. Shorter immobilization periods are favored when possible. A consensus definition of an unstable elbow still needs to be improved. Unstable simple elbow dislocation may benefit from surgical intervention with different techniques showing similar outcomes. Advances in surgical procedures and suture designs, including tapes, and ligament augmentation, need to prove their role in managing acute elbow instability.

Conclusion

There is a need for higher quality studies after the reduction of an AED, including discerning the outcome of specific patterns of injury and particular groups of patients like high-level athletes or people with preoperative laxity. Comparison between different surgical techniques is warranted, including arthroscopic techniques and types of ligament augmentation to promote early motion and reduce postoperative stiffness.

[Elbow joint dislocation : Frequent concomitant injuries and current treatment concepts]

Dislocations of the elbow joint are among the most prevalent dislocation injuries in the human body after shoulder joint dislocations and represent a challenge in the clinical routine because of the concomitant injuries and complications. They predominantly affect young adults who become injured during athletic or daily activities. A distinction is generally made between a simple elbow dislocation and a dislocation fracture of the elbow; however, a uniform classification or treatment algorithm has not yet been established, especially for simple elbow dislocations with associated ligamentous, muscular and capsular concomitant injuries. Due to this and the complexity of this injury, a standardized approach is needed to initiate the optimal treatment at an early stage and to correctly select the narrow treatment pathway between impending chronic instability and elbow stiffness.

Early Joint Use Following Elbow Dislocation Limits Range-of-Motion Loss and Tissue Pathology in Posttraumatic Joint Contracture

BACKGROUND

Simple elbow dislocation occurs at an incidence of 2.9 to 5.21 dislocations per 100,000 person-years, with as many as 62% of these patients experiencing long-term elbow joint contracture, stiffness, and/or pain. Poor outcomes and the need for secondary surgical intervention can often be prevented nonoperatively with early or immediate active mobilization and physical therapy. However, immobilization or limited mobilization may be necessary following trauma, and it is unknown how different periods of immobilization affect pathological changes in elbow joint tissue and how these changes relate to range of motion (ROM). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of varying the initiation of free mobilization on elbow ROM and histological features in an animal model of elbow posttraumatic joint contracture.

METHODS

Traumatic elbow dislocation was surgically induced unilaterally in rats. Injured forelimbs were immobilized in bandages for 3, 7, 14, or 21 days; free mobilization was then allowed until 42 days after injury. Post-mortem joint ROM testing and histological analysis were performed. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare ROM data between control and injured groups, and Pearson correlations were performed between ROM parameters and histological outcomes.

RESULTS

Longer immobilization periods resulted in greater ROM reductions. The anterior and posterior capsule showed increases in cellularity, fibroblasts, adhesions, fibrosis, and thickness, whereas the measured outcomes in cartilage were mostly unaffected. All measured histological characteristics of the capsule were negatively correlated with ROM, indicating that higher degrees of pathology corresponded with less ROM.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer immobilization periods resulted in greater ROM reductions, which correlated with worse histological outcomes in the capsule in an animal model of posttraumatic elbow contracture. The subtle differences in the timing of ROM and capsule tissue changes revealed in the present study provide new insight into the distinct timelines of biomechanical changes as well as regional tissue pathology.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study showed that beginning active mobilization 3 days after injury minimized posttraumatic joint contracture, thereby supporting an immediate-motion clinical treatment strategy (when possible). Furthermore, uninjured but pathologically altered periarticular tissues near the injury location may contribute to more severe contracture during longer immobilization periods as the disease state progresses.

Patient satisfaction, joint stability and return to sports following simple elbow dislocations: surgical versus non-surgical treatment

PURPOSE

While conservative management is commonly promoted for simple elbow dislocations, the importance of primary surgical treatment in these injuries is still undetermined. The objective of this study was to report patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sports (RTS) and joint stability using ultrasound in patients following conservative or surgical treatment after simple elbow dislocation.

METHODS

Patients with a minimum follow-up of 24 months after conservative (CT) or surgical treatment (ST) following simple elbow dislocation were included in this retrospective study. To evaluate patients' postoperative outcome and satisfaction, the Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS) was used, and validated scores such as the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), the Quick Disability of Arm and Shoulder Score (Quick-DASH) and RTS were assessed. For objective assessment of residual joint instability, a standardized clinical examination as well as a dynamic ultrasound evaluation of the affected and the contralateral elbow was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (26 women, 18 men) with an average age of 41.5 ± 15.3 years were available for follow-up survey (65.5 ± 30.4 months; range 26-123). 21 patients were treated conservatively and twenty-three patients received surgical treatment. CT and ST resulted in similar outcome with regard to ROM, ESAS (CT: 99.4 ± 1.5; ST: 99.8 ± 0.3), MEPS (CT: 97.3 ± 6.8 points; ST: 98.7 ± 3.3) and Quick-DASH (CT: 7.8 ± 10.4; ST: 6.3 ± 7.9) (n.s.). There was no difference in elbow stability and laxity measured by ultrasound between the study groups and compared to the healthy elbow (n.s.). Two patients of the CT group (10%) complained about persistent subjective elbow instability. RTS was faster after surgical compared to conservative treatment (p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Both, conservative and surgical treatment results in high patient satisfaction and good-to-excellent functional outcome after simple elbow dislocation. Even though ultrasound evaluation showed no significant differences in joint gapping between groups, 10% of conservatively treated patients complained about severe subjective instability. Surgically treated patients returned faster to their preoperatively performed sports. Thus, primary surgical treatment may be beneficial for high demanding patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, Level III.

A novel mouse model of hindlimb joint contracture with 3D-printed casts

Stiff joints formed after trauma, surgery or immobilization are frustrating for surgeons, therapists and patients alike. Unfortunately, the study of contracture is limited by available animal model systems, which focus on the utilization of larger mammals and joint trauma. Here we describe a novel mouse-based model system for the generation of joint contracture using 3D-printed clamshell casts. With this model system we are able to generate both reversible and irreversible contractures of the knee and ankle. Four- or 8-month-old female mice were casted for either 2 or 3 weeks before liberation. All groups formed measurable contractures of the knee and ankle. Younger mice immobilized for less time formed reversible contractures of the knee and ankle. We were able to generate irreversible contracture with either longer immobilization time or the utilization of older mice. The contracture formation translated into differences in gait, which were detectable using the DigiGait® analysis system. This novel model system provides a higher throughput, lower cost and more powerful tool in studying the molecular and cellular mechanisms considering the large existing pool of transgenic/knockout murine strains.

Biomechanical Comparison of Two Fixation Techniques for Lateral Ulnar Collateral Ligament Repair With Ligament Bracing

PURPOSE

Ligament bracing is a technique of suture reinforcement that can be used to augment lateral ulnar collateral ligament repair in the treatment of posterolateral rotatory instability of the elbow, thereby improving early stability of the repair. However, multiple failures of the ulnar anchor during implantation have been documented. We hypothesized that the use of a cortical button for ulnar fixation of the ligament brace would be biomechanically comparable to a suture anchor construct.

METHODS

Sixteen elbows were tested with a materials testing machine. The intact, dissected, and repaired lateral collateral ligament complex was tested with a cyclic varus rotational torque of 0.5-3.5 Nm in 120°, 90°, 60°, and 30° elbow flexion. For the repair, the specimens were randomized into 2 groups: ulnar fixation of the ligament bracing using a suture anchor and ulnar fixation of the ligament bracing using a cortical button. The number of implant failures was documented. A load-to-failure protocol was conducted in 90° elbow flexion.

RESULTS

Load to failure was comparable and was found to be 20.7 Nm in the suture anchor group and 21.8 Nm in the cortical button group. Laxity after ligament bracing did not differ significantly between suture anchor and cortical button fixation. Compared with the native ligament, the laxity was significantly reduced after ligament bracing. The failure mode was slippage of the suture tape through the humeral anchor in all cases. Additionally, the capitellum was damaged in 9 of 16 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

A cortical button for ulnar fixation of the ligament bracing was comparable with a suture anchor fixation with regard to biomechanical properties such as laxity and load to failure.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A cortical button fixation is less prone to failure of insertion. This would improve the implantation technique, while clinical results are expected to be comparable.

Complications and range of motion of patients with an elbow dislocation treated with a hinged external fixator: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Elbow dislocations are at risk for persistent instability and stiffness of the joint. Treatment with a hinged external fixation provides elbow joint stability, and allows early mobilization to prevent stiffness. Mounting a hinged elbow fixator correctly, however, is technically challenging. The low incidence rate of elbow dislocations with persistent instability suggests that centralization would result in higher surgeon exposure and consequently in less complications. This study aimed to investigate the results of treatment of elbow dislocations with a hinged elbow fixator on the rate of complications, range of motion, level of pain and restrictions in activities of daily living.

METHODS

A retrospective observational cohort study in a level I trauma center, in which the majority of patients was treated by a dedicated elbow surgeon, was performed. All patients of 16 years or older treated with a hinged external elbow fixator between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2017 were included. The fixator could be used (1) for the treatment of persistent instability in acute/residual simple and complex dislocations or (2) as revision surgery to treat joint incongruency or a stiff elbow. Patient and injury characteristics, details on treatment, complications, secondary interventions, and range of motion were extracted from the patients' medical files.

RESULTS

The results of treatment of 34 patients were analyzed with a median follow-up of 13 months. The fixator was removed after a median period of 48 days. Fixator-related complications encountered were six pintract infections, one redisclocation, one joint incongruency, one muscle hernia, and one hardware failure. The median range of motion at the end of follow-up was 140° flexion, 15° constraint in extension, 90° pronation, and 80° supination.

CONCLUSION

A hinged elbow fixator applied by a dedicated elbow surgeon in cases of elbow instability after elbow dislocations can result in excellent joint function. Fixator-related complications are mostly mild and only temporary.

Early functional mobilization for non-operative treatment of simple elbow dislocations: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review aims to elucidate a non-operative rehabilitation program that optimizes recovery based on published approaches and outcomes.

METHODS

Searches of four databases from inception to 1 January 2020 were performed to identify clinical studies addressing the non-operative management of simple elbow dislocations.

RESULTS

Of 2435 studies that were eligible for title screen, 15 studies satisfied inclusion criteria. Three randomized control studies demonstrated that early mobilization expedited the return of range of motion, function and return to work or activities, however, resulted in increased pain within the six-week rehabilitation period compared to Plaster of Paris casting for 21 days. Patients returned to work sooner after early mobilization (10 vs. 18 days; p = 0.02) compared to Plaster of Paris casting. In all studies, early mobilization resulted in similar re-dislocation rates of 1.3% (3/237) versus 2.2% (12/549) in those with Plaster of Paris casting as well as lower incidence of heterotopic ossification (36% vs. 54%). No significant differences between rehabilitation protocols were determined; however, the large majority of recent papers utilized rehabilitation protocols.

CONCLUSION

Early mobilization of simple elbow dislocations results in early return of Range-of-Motion, function and return to work with no increase in complication rates; however, increased pain during the rehabilitation period.

Elbow Dislocations in the National Football League: Epidemiology and Management

Background Currently, it is not known how the combined osseous and ligamentous injury of a traumatic elbow dislocation in a National Football League (NFL) athlete affects management and return to play. In this study, we aimed to describe the epidemiology, management, and return to play for elbow dislocations in NFL athletes. Methodology This is a descriptive observational study. A retrospective review of all elbow dislocations between 2000 and 2014 (15 seasons) was performed using the NFL Injury Surveillance System (NFLISS). Results Over 15 NFL seasons, 82 elbow dislocations were recorded in the NFLISS. Among players who reported surgery (n = 5), players missed an average of 73.8 days of play. Among those who did not report surgery, players missed an average of 36.1 days. The overall incidence was 0.26 dislocation events per 10,000 athlete exposures. The majority of these injuries occurred during regular-season games, in defensive linebackers and linemen, during tackling contact with another player, and most commonly on a running play. Conclusions This study demonstrates that an elbow dislocation is not a career-ending or season-ending injury in an NFL cohort. Information regarding incidence, positions affected, whether surgical management is utilized, and return to play will help players who sustain and physicians who treat these injuries in elite football athletes understand the impact of their injuries.

Simple traumatic elbow dislocations; benefit from early functional rehabilitation: A systematic review with meta-analysis including PRISMA criteria

INTRODUCTION

Elbow dislocation is the second most frequent joint dislocation after shoulder dislocation. They have a high relevance because they can result in subsequent damage and limitations in range of motion. The treatment options are controversially discussed.The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review the literature and analyze the evidence of early functional rehabilitation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed via Ovid Medline, whereby 1645 publications were identified and evaluated in a stepwise approach. Of these publications 29 met the inclusion criteria of the authors and described simple elbow dislocations in 5765 patients.Data from the studies and subgroups included were initially categorized descriptively in conservative and surgical primary therapies, in immobilizing (immobilization lasting 2 weeks or longer) and free-functional follow-up treatments, and those data were then extracted from each subgroup in absolutes. We then pooled these numbers into descriptive statistics to ensure their comparability. We determined the success rates from the numbers of excellent and good results of the specific used outcome scores.

RESULTS

The effect estimate of the conservative therapy's success rate was 84% and for surgical treatment 80% (P < .0001). The difference between the immobilizing treatment (78% success rate) and early-function therapy (83% success rate) was significant (P = .002).In a subgroup analysis the success rate of conservative and immobilizing therapy was 79%, of conservative and early-functional therapy 91%, of surgical and immobilizing groups' was 77% and of the surgical and early-functional therapies was 93%. The difference among the 4 treatment options was significant (P < .0001), as were differences between the 2 conservative groups (P < .0001) and between the 2 surgical groups (P = .044).

DISCUSSION

Conservative therapy is the dominant therapy. Regardless of the primary therapy chosen in simple elbow dislocations: early functional follow-up care seems to be superior to immobilizing therapy with a duration more than 2 weeks.

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.

Changes in the management of pediatric medial humeral epicondyle fractures with and without associated elbow dislocation

Purpose The optimal management of medial humeral epicondyle fractures continues to be debated since decades. This single center study analyzes changes and optimizations of treatment over an observation period of 16 years and reports the results. Materials and Methods Retrospective analysis of all patients treated with a medial humeral epicondyle fracture between 2005 and 2020 at our institution. Results Ninety-six patients (mean 9.3 years, range 1 - 15) were included in the study. In 25 cases (26 %), the fracture was associated with an elbow dislocation. Most patients received surgical treatment (83.3 %), whereas 17.7 % were treated nonoperatively. Surgical treatment consisted of open reduction and fixation with compression screw (n = 44 steel, n = 2 absorbable), K-wire (n = 30), a combination of screw/K-wire (n = 2), or a PDS suture (n = 1). Compression screws have been used significantly more often in the latter half of the study period (p = 0.006). Patients were immobilized in a long arm cast for 29 days (range 11 - 50). Eleven surgically treated patients were early mobilized in an elbow orthosis. After a mean follow up of 7.6 months [2 - 61), Mayo elbow performance index (MEPI) outcome was excellent in all 96 patients. Loss of elbow movement (LOM) was found to be mild in 30 and moderate in 15 patients. LOM was found to be associated with surgical treatment (p = 0.001), and with concomitant elbow dislocations (p = 0.29). One pseudarthrosis occurred after conservative treatment. A persistence of ulnar nerve palsy or recurrent joint instability has not been described. Conclusion Most children with medial humeral epicondyle fractures nowadays undergo surgery. Screw osteosynthesis represents the increasingly preferred method in order to prevent joint instability or non-union, and to allow shorter immobilization duration. Overall results after medial epicondyle fractures are good.

The post-traumatic stiff elbow: A review

Upper extremity function is highly dependent on elbow motion in order to adequately position the hand in space. Loss of this motion due to stiffness following trauma can cause patients substantial disability, leading to difficulties with performing activities of daily living. Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is challenging to treat, and therefore prevention is of paramount importance. Key measures that can be used to prevent elbow stiffness are early surgical intervention for fracture or joint instability, as well as active mobilisation, which helps to prevent oedema and an increase in viscosity of inflammatory exudates. Other options include splinting and continuous passive mobilisation. Once non-operative methods of addressing post-traumatic stiffness have been exhausted, arthrolysis of the stiff elbow can be performed via open or arthroscopic means depending on the type of pathology involved (intrinsic or extrinsic contracture) and experience of the surgeon with elbow arthroscopy. The particular open approach used depends on several factors, which include the formation and location of any heterotopic ossification present. Improvements in range of motion can be expected with both open and arthroscopic techniques, which can be effective and rewarding for patients. Post-operative rehabilitation, particularly early active mobilisation, should be considered essential in order to optimise patient outcomes following surgery. This review aims to explore elbow stiffness following traumatic aetiology, assessing its pathogenesis and prevention, as well as reviewing surgical treatment options and post-operative rehabilitation.

Some outcomes of patients treated operatively for distal humerus fractures are affected by hand dominance

PURPOSE

This study sought to compare postoperative outcomes and complications between patients with distal humerus fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of their non-dominant versus dominant arm.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who sustained a distal humerus fracture treated operatively with ORIF at one academic institution between 2011 and 2015 was performed. Measured outcomes included complications, time to fracture union, painful hardware, removal of hardware, Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), and elbow range of motion. Differences in outcomes between patients who underwent surgery of their dominant upper extremity and those who underwent surgery of their non-dominant extremity were assessed.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients met inclusion criteria. Forty (58.0%) underwent ORIF of a distal humerus fracture on their non-dominant arm and 29 (42.0%) on their dominant arm. Groups did not differ with respect to demographics, injury information, or surgical management. Mean overall follow-up was 14.1 ± 10.5 months, with all patients achieving at least 6 months follow-up. The non-dominant cohort experienced a higher proportion of postoperative complications (P = 0.048), painful hardware (P = 0.018), and removal of hardware (P = 0.002). At latest follow-up, the non-dominant cohort had lower MEPI scores (P = 0.037) but no difference in elbow arc of motion (P = 0.314).

CONCLUSION

Patients who sustained a distal humerus fracture of their non-dominant arm treated with ORIF experienced more postoperative complications, reported a greater incidence of painful hardware, underwent removal of hardware more often, and had worse functional recovery in this study. Physicians should emphasize the importance of physical therapy and maintaining arm movement especially when the non-dominant arm is involved following distal humerus fracture repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Biomechanical comparison of lateral collateral ligament reconstruction with and without additional internal bracing using a three-dimensional elbow simulator

BACKGROUND

Although an additional internal bracing significantly increases stability in a repair of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament, it remains unclear whether it also does in reconstruction. Aim of this study was to implement a three-dimensional elbow simulator for testing posterolateral rotatory instability. We hypothesized that (1) reconstruction with and without internal bracing is comparable in biomechanical properties, and (2) there would be higher load-to-failure with internal bracing.

METHODS

Posterolateral rotatory instability was tested by imitating the lateral pivot shift test in 16 elbows. Valgus and supination torques were simultaneously increased stepwise up to 1.2 Nm. Specimens were tested at 30°, 60°, 90°, and 120° elbow flexion with an intact lateral collateral ligament complex, dissected complex, and after reconstruction with or without internal bracing. Outcome measures included joint gapping, laxity, and load to failure.

FINDINGS

With the implemented elbow simulator no significant difference was observed for gapping or laxity between both treatment groups. Comparing treatment and native ligament, gapping was reduced, especially with increased elbow flexion. Laxity was also reduced at some flexion angles. The mean load-to-failure was 8.1 ± 2.7 Nm without and 9.6 ± 3.6 Nm with internal bracing (P = 0.645).

INTERPRETATION

Both treatments were comparable in biomechanical properties but did not fully restore the native state. Although the additional augmentation of the LUCL reconstruction tends to increase the maximum load to failure, this difference was not statistically significant. Still, reconstruction with internal bracing seems to be a reasonable option in selected primary reconstructions. It could also be useful in revision reconstruction.

Suture tape augmentation of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament increases load to failure in simulated posterolateral rotatory instability

PURPOSE

Simple elbow dislocations are accompanied with lateral ulnar collateral ligament ruptures. For persisting instability, surgery is indicated to prevent chronic posterolateral rotatory instability. After lateral collateral ligament (LCL) complex repair the repair is protected by temporary immobilization, limited range of motion and hinged bracing. Internal bracing is an operative alternative augmenting the LCL repair using non-absorbable suture tapes. However, the stability of LCL repair with and without additional augmentation remains unclear. The hypothesis was that LCL repair with additional suture tape augmentation would improve load to failure. Secondary goal of this study was to evaluate different humeral fixation techniques. A humeral fixation using separate anchors for the LCL repair and the augmentation was not expected to provide superior stability compared to using only one single anchor.

METHODS

Twenty-one elbows were tested. A cyclic varus rotational torque of 0.5-3.5 Nm was applied in 90°, 60°, 30°, and 120° elbow flexion to the intact, torn, and repaired LCLs. The specimens were randomized into three groups: repair alone (group I), repair with additional internal bracing using two anchors (group II), repair using one humeral anchor (group III). A load-to-failure protocol was conducted.

RESULTS

Load to failure was significantly higher in groups II (26.6 Nm; P = 0.017) and III (23.18 Nm; P = 0.038) than in group I (12.13 Nm). No significant difference was observed between group II and III. All specimens lost reduction after LCL dissection by a mean of 4.48° ± 4.99° (range 0.66-15.82). The mean reduction gain after repair was 7.21° ± 4.97° (2.70-21.23; mean over reduction, 2.73°). The laxity was comparable between the intact and repaired LCLs (n.s.), except for varus movements at 30° in group II (P = 0.035) and 30° (P = 0.001) and 120° in group III (P = 0.008) with significantly less laxity. Inserting the ulnar suture anchor showed failure in the thread in 10 cases.

CONCLUSION

LCL repair with additional internal bracing yielded higher load to failure than repair alone. Repair with additional internal bracing for the humeral side using one anchor was sufficient. A higher primary stability would facilitate postoperative management and allow immediate functional treatment. Reducing the number of humeral anchors would save costs.

An Individualized Intra-Articular Stabilization Device Designed Based on 3D Printing Technology for Traumatic Instability of the Ulnohumeral Joint

We aimed to design an individualized intra-articular stabilization device based on 3D printing technology and investigate the clinical effects of this device for treating traumatic instability of the ulnohumeral joint. This study enrolled nine patients with traumatic instability of the ulnohumeral joint (age: 47.2 ± 1.80 years) who received treatment between March 2018 and March 2019 in our hospital. All patients underwent a thin-layer computed tomography (CT) scan of the elbow before surgery. The original injury and repair models of the elbow were printed using 3D printing technology based on CT data. An individualized intra-articular stabilization device was designed with a 2.0 mm Kirschner wire based on the repair model. Nine patients agreed to receive surgical treatment for elbow disease and placement of the intra-articular stabilization device. The nine patients underwent open reduction through a posterior median approach, and the intra-articular stabilization device was placed in the elbow. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications were recorded and followed up. The device was removed at two postoperative months, and the Mayo score was used to evaluate elbow function. Four months after removing the intra-articular stabilization device, elbow joint function was evaluated again using the Mayo score. The mean operation time was 100.1 ± 8.2 min, and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 35.5 ± 7.1 ml. No complications occurred after operation. Two months after surgery, eight patients received an excellent Mayo score, and one patient received a good Mayo score. Four months after removal of the intra-articular stabilization device, eight patients received an excellent Mayo score, and one patient received a good Mayo score. The individualized intra-articular stabilization device can increase ulnohumeral stability and achieve rapid functional recovery of the elbow.

Elbow Instability: Evaluation and Treatment

Acute elbow dislocations are commonly seen in clinical practice, and attention to management principles and strategies can help facilitate improved outcomes. Patients may present with simple elbow dislocation, in which nonoperative treatment is highly successful. Alternatively, fracture dislocations can be sometimes easily managed but frequently are associated with the need for surgical intervention and operative and postoperative challenges.

Simple and stable elbow dislocations: results after conservative treatment

Background and aim of the work:

In adults, elbow dislocations are second in frequency after shoulder dislocations. They are often the result of a trauma due to accidental falls on the palm of the hand with the elbow flexed. In most cases this mechanism produces a posterior dislocation of the radius and ulna with respect to the humerus. The therapeutic approach was usually conservative in the past and it was characterized by manual reduction and plaster immobilization. More recently, as consequence of biomechanic and pathophysiology studies, the management of these injuries has gradually changed. The current trend is to immobilize the elbow only for few days and to evaluate its stability several times. In case of instability surgery may be indicated. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of simple stable elbow dislocations treated conservatively between january 2012 and december 2018.

Methods:

Twenty-six patients were included. All subjects underwent to a follow-up visit, in which clinical functional tests were performed in order to evaluate any stiffness in flexion-extension, prono-supination and instability in varus-valgus. In addition, patients were asked to complete three questionnaires (DASH, MEPS, SF-36) to evaluate how much the pathology interfered with ADL’s.

Results:

Outcomes showed that prolonged immobilization increased stiffness in flexion and extension with the need of longer reabilithation. The recovery of prono-supination was instead always optimal. ADL’s migth be influenced by the traumatic event and its management.

Conclusions:

Results of conservative treatment of simple elbow dislocation are generally satisfactory. A precise flow-chart of the patient management after trauma is essential in order to detect unstable lesions and to plan the correct therapy. This is the basis for the prevention of joint stiffness and long-term insatbility.

Elbow Dislocation

This article is a brief overview of the elbow dislocations focusing on updates in treatment and rehabilitation protocols. The fight between obtaining elbow stability without leading to long-term elbow stiffness has been a continued focus in field of sports medicine. This article highlights advances made to help treat the injuries appropriately and obtain optimal patient outcomes.

PrEvention of posttraumatic contractuRes with Ketotifen 2 (PERK 2) - protocol for a multicenter randomized clinical trial

Background

Injuries and resulting stiffness around joints, especially the elbow, have huge psychological effects by reducing quality of life through interference with normal daily activities such as feeding, dressing, grooming, and reaching for objects. Over the last several years and through numerous research results, the myofibroblast-mast cell-neuropeptide axis of fibrosis had been implicated in post-traumatic joint contractures. Pre-clinical models and a pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) demonstrated the feasibility and safety of using Ketotifen Fumarate (KF), a mast cell stabilizer to prevent elbow joint contractures. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of KF in reducing joint contracture severity in adult participants with operately treated elbow fractures and/or dislocations.

Methods/design

A Phase III randomized, controlled, double-blinded multicentre trial with 3 parallel groups (KF 2 mg or 5 mg or lactose placebo twice daily orally for 6 weeks). The study population consist of adults who are at least 18 years old and within 7 days of injury. The types of injuries are distal humerus (AO/OTA type 13) and/or proximal ulna and/or proximal radius fractures (AO/OTA type 2 U1 and/or 2R1) and/or elbow dislocations (open fractures with or without nerve injury may be included). A stratified randomization scheme by hospital site will be used to assign eligible participants to the groups in a 1:1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is change in elbow flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) arc from baseline to 12 weeks post-randomization. The secondary outcomes are changes in ROM from baseline to 6, 24 & 52 weeks, PROMs at 2, 6, 12, 24 & 52 weeks and impact of KF on safety including serious adverse events and fracture healing. Descriptive analysis for all outcomes will be reported and ANCOVA be used to evaluate the efficacy KF over lactose placebo with respect to the improvement in ROM.

Discussion

The results of this study will provide evidence for the use of KF in reducing post-traumatic joint contractures and improving quality of life after joint injuries.

Trial registration

This study was prospectively registered (July 10, 2018) with ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT03582176.

Early mobilization versus plaster immobilization of simple elbow dislocations: a cost analysis of the FuncSiE multicenter randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The primary aim was to assess and compare the total costs (direct health care costs and indirect costs due to loss of production) after early mobilization versus plaster immobilization in patients with a simple elbow dislocation. It was hypothesized that early mobilization would not lead to higher direct and indirect costs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used data of a multicenter randomized clinical trial (FuncSiE trial). From August 25, 2009 until September 18, 2012, 100 adult patients with a simple elbow dislocation were recruited and randomized to early mobilization (immediate motion exercises; n = 48) or 3 weeks plaster immobilization (n = 52). Patients completed questionnaires on health-related quality of life [EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS)], health care use, and work absence. Follow-up was 1 year. Primary outcome were the total costs at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in EQ-5D, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS between the two groups. Mean total costs per patient were €3624 in the early mobilization group versus €7072 in the plaster group (p = 0.094). Shorter work absenteeism in the early mobilization group (10 versus 18 days; p = 0.027) did not lead to significantly lower costs for loss of productivity (€1719 in the early mobilization group versus €4589; p = 0.120).

CONCLUSION

From a clinical and a socio-economic point of view, early mobilization should be the treatment of choice for a simple elbow dislocation. Plaster immobilization has inferior results at almost double the cost.

Early fixation versus conservative therapy of multiple, simple rib fractures (FixCon): protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Background

Multiple rib fractures are common injuries in both the young and elderly. Rib fractures account for 10% of all trauma admissions and are seen in up to 39% of patients after thoracic trauma. With morbidity and mortality rates increasing with the number of rib fractures as well as poor quality of life at long-term follow-up, multiple rib fractures pose a serious health hazard. Operative fixation of flail chest is beneficial over nonoperative treatment regarding, among others, pneumonia and both intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay. With no high-quality evidence on the effects of multiple simple rib fracture treatment, the optimal treatment modality remains unknown. This study sets out to investigate outcome of operative fixation versus nonoperative treatment of multiple simple rib fractures.

Methods

The proposed study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients will be eligible if they have three or more multiple simple rib fractures of which at least one is dislocated over one shaft width or with unbearable pain (visual analog scale (VAS) or numeric rating scale (NRS) > 6). Patients in the intervention group will be treated with open reduction and internal fixation. Pre- and postoperative care equals treatment in the control group. The control group will receive nonoperative treatment, consisting of pain management, bronchodilator inhalers, oxygen support or mechanical ventilation if needed, and pulmonary physical therapy. The primary outcome measure will be occurrence of pneumonia within 30 days after trauma. Secondary outcome measures are the need and duration of mechanical ventilation, thoracic pain and analgesics use, (recovery of) pulmonary function, hospital and ICU length of stay, thoracic injury-related and surgery-related complications and mortality, secondary interventions, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness comprising health care consumption and productivity loss. Follow-up visits will be standardized and daily during hospital admission, at 14 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months.

Discussion

With favorable results in flail chest patients, operative treatment may also be beneficial in patients with multiple simple rib fractures. The FixCon trial will be the first study to compare clinical, functional, and economic outcome between operative fixation and nonoperative treatment for multiple simple rib fractures.

Trial registration

www.trialregister.nl, NTR7248. Registered May 31, 2018.

Functional elbow range of motion 6 months after contracture release and ORIF K-wire in elbow stiffness with malunion capitellum and neglected radial head and ulnar dislocation: a case report

INTRODUCTION

Elbow stiffness is the most common complication following trauma of the elbow. This is because the elbow joint is susceptible to effusion, hemarthrosis, scarring, and capsule thickening due to its small intracapsular volume. Surgical treatment is therefore necessary to release soft tissue contracture.

CASE

A male teenager was unable to flex his elbow since 1 year prior to admission after falling down during football practice. He didn't seek any medical treatment and had his elbow massaged since 5 months ago. On physical examination, his right elbow was extended, with flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) of 30⁰ - 0⁰. On the radiograph, there was malunion fracture of left capitellum and neglected posterosuperior dislocation of radial head and ulna. Surgery was performed to release contracture and correct the malunion. Normal activity with functional elbow flexion-extension ROM of 110⁰ - 30⁰ was achieved in 6 months after operation.

DISCUSSION

Elbow stiffness is a challenging case for surgeon, especially in regards of developing good perioperative plan. The aim of treatment for elbow stiffness is to achieve a pain-free and functional elbow ROM.

CONCLUSION

To achieve functional elbow ROM, surgical treatment was necessary to release the contracture. In addition, the etiology of trauma must be thoroughly investigated and a good rehabilitation program must be integrative to the treatment.

Ligaments injuries check-up and assessment of their healing potential in simple posterolateral elbow dislocation: about 25 cases

INTRODUCTION

Elbow dislocation can lead to instability and stiffness of the elbow. The main goal of this study was to list the initial elbow ligaments injuries caused by simple posterolateral elbow dislocations. The secondary goals were to assess ligament healing 2 months after the initial dislocation, to research a correlation between ligaments injuries and clinical course, and to search for predictive factors of instability.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who had simple posterolateral elbow dislocation for the first time between January 2015 and May 2016 were included. Each patient had an MRI scan of their traumatised elbow on the day of the dislocation and then again 2 months later. The assessment was performed thanks to a clinical examination and calculation of functional recovery scores. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to research a correlation between the healing of ligaments injuries and clinical course.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were included in the study. The initial MRI scans showed 70% and 54% ligament rupture, respectively, for the anterior band (ant MCL) and the posterior band (post MCL) of the medial collateral ligament (MCL), as well as 79% for the ulnar (ULCL) and 50% for the radial (RLCL) lateral collateral ligaments. The healing rate 2 months after dislocation was fairly low from 18% for the ULCL up to 41% for the anterior band of the MCL. No correlation was found between the ligament healing noticeable on MRI scans and clinical course. No elbow instability was diagnosed during the 4-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Elbow dislocation is particularly damaging for ligaments. There is no predominance on medial or lateral ligament for rupture. The low healing rate 2 months after the initial dislocation could be explained by performing a follow-up MRI scan too early.

Reattachment of the flexor and extensor tendons at the epicondyle in elbow instability: a biomechanical comparison of techniques

Background

Elbow dislocation represents a common injury, especially in the younger population. If treated surgically, the reattached tendons require a high amount of primary stability to allow for an early rehabilitation to avoid postoperative stiffness. The purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical properties of a single and a double row technique for reattachment of the common extensor and common flexor muscles origin. We hypothesized that the double row technique would provide greater stability in terms of pullout forces than the single row technique.

Methods

Twelve cadaveric specimens were randomized into two groups of fixation methods for the common extensor tendon or the common flexor tendon at the elbow (1): a single row technique using two knotted 3.0 mm suture anchors, and (2) a double row technique using an additional knotless 3.5 mm anchor. The repairs were cyclically loaded over 500 cycles at 1 Hz from 10 N to a maximum of 100 N (extensors) or 150 N (flexors), and then pulled to failure. Stiffness and maximum load at failure and mode of failure were recorded and calculated.

Results

No significant differences in stiffness were observed between the two techniques for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (P = 0.701 and P = 0.306, respectively). The mean maximum load at failure indicated that the double row construct was significantly stronger than the single row construct. This was found to be true for both the extensor and flexor reattachment (213.6; SD 78.7 N versus 384.1; SD 105.6 N, P = 0.010 and 203.7; SD 65.8 N versus 318.0; SD 64.6 N, P = 0.013, respectively).

Conclusions

The double row technique provides significant greater stability to the reattached common flexor or extensor origin to the medial or lateral epicondyle. Thus, it should be considered in the development of improved repair techniques for stabilizers of the elbow.

Study design

Controlled laboratory study.

[Simple elbow dislocations in children : Systematic review and meta-analysis]

BACKGROUND

Simple elbow dislocations in childhood are rare. Nevertheless, they have a high relevance because they can result in subsequent damage and limitations in range of motion. The treatment options are controversially discussed.

AIM

The purpose of the study was to review the literature and to derive a recommendation for the best treatment concept.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed via Ovid Medline, whereby 1645 publications were identified (initially nonspecific for age) and evaluated in a stepwise approach. Of these publications four met the inclusion criteria of the authors. The analysis was carried out descriptively and in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The 4 publications included described simple elbow dislocations in 81 children (≤16 years). The weighted average age was 9.9 years with a gender ratio of 3.8 (boys:girls). The median follow-up was 49 months. Posterior and posterolateral dislocations were the most common with 73%. In 69 children the treatment was conservative and of these 66 were immobilized for longer than 2 weeks after closed reduction. The 12 children who had surgical treatment suffered dislocations that had not been reduced for longer than 3 weeks. The success rate of the conservatively treated immobilized group was 88%, of the conservatively treated non-immobilized group 70% and of the surgical group 42%. The differences between the success rates of the treatment methods was significant (p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

Simple elbow dislocations in children are rare. They most commonly occur in posterior and posterolateral directions. The prognosis is favorable; however a timely diagnosis and correct reduction are relevant for a good outcome.

A Comparative Study of Conservative Functional Treatment versus Acute Ligamentous Repair in Simple Dislocation of the Elbow in Adults

BACKGROUND

Elbow dislocation is the second most frequent type of large joint dislocations in adults. Standard treatment of simple elbow dislocation (SED) without manifestation of instability includes closed reduction, short-term immobilization of the elbow followed by functional aftercare. This study evaluates SED treatment, comparing outcomes of conservative functional treatment and surgical therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

54 adult patients with SED without manifest instability treated in tertiary hospital between January 2008 and June 2015 were analyzed in this retrospective study. 28 patients were treated conservatively. Closed elbow reduction was followed by short-term plaster splint and active rehabilitation. Twenty six patients underwent closed elbow reduction and subsequent reconstruction of torn collateral ligaments. Postoperatively, plaster splint was applied followed by rehabilitation.

RESULTS

Patients who were treated conservatively reached statistically significant better scores in Quick Disability Arm Shoulder Hand, Oxford Elbow Score, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Functional conservative treatment resulted in a higher range of motion. The complication rate was higher in the group of surgically treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful examination of elbow stability after closed reduction of SED is crucial for further therapy. Patients with stable SED should be treated with functional conservative therapy. Surgical collateral ligaments revision and reconstruction are indicated only for patients with manifestation of elbow instability.

The Assessment and Management of Simple Elbow Dislocations

Background:

Simple elbow dislocations are a commonly seen joint dislocation involving a sequential disruption of the soft tissue stabilisers without a significant associated fracture.

Methods:

A selective literature search was performed and personal surgical experiences are reported.

Results:

The majority of these injuries can be treated with expedient closed reduction, with the intact bony congruency of the elbow joint conferring early stability. Early mobilisation after reduction results in a faster recovery with good functional outcomes. Surgical intervention for persistent instability or stiffness is uncommonly required. Although, early surgical ligamentous repair has been considered, the current evidence does not demonstrate any long-term benefits compared to non-operative treatment.

Conclusion:

The majority of simple elbow dislocations can be successfully managed non-operatively with good reliable outcomes. Careful follow up is essential, however, to identify patients that may occasionally develop persistent instability or stiffness and require intervention.

Minimal important change and other measurement properties of the Oxford Elbow Score and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand in patients with a simple elbow dislocation; validation study alongside the multicenter FuncSiE trial

Study design

Validation study using data from a multicenter, randomized, clinical trial (RCT).

Objectives

To evaluate the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimal important change (MIC) of the Dutch version of the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH) in patients with a simple elbow dislocation.

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly important for assessing outcome following elbow injuries, both in daily practice and in clinical research. However measurement properties of the OES and Quick-DASH in these patients are not fully known.

Methods

OES and Quick-DASH were completed four times until one year after trauma. Mayo Elbow Performance Index, pain (VAS), Short Form-36, and EuroQol-5D were completed for comparison. Data of a multicenter RCT (n = 100) were used. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach’s alpha. Construct and longitudinal validity were assessed by determining hypothesized strength of correlation between scores or changes in scores, respectively, of (sub)scales. Finally, floor and ceiling effects, MIC, and smallest detectable change (SDC) were determined.

Results

OES and Quick-DASH demonstrated adequate internal consistency (Cronbach α, 0.882 and 0.886, respectively). Construct validity and longitudinal validity of both scales were supported by >75% correctly hypothesized correlations. MIC and SDC were 8.2 and 12.0 point for OES, respectively. For Quick-DASH, these values were 11.7 and 25.0, respectively.

Conclusions

OES and Quick-DASH are reliable, valid, and responsive instruments for evaluating elbow-related quality of life. The anchor-based MIC was 8.2 points for OES and 11.7 for Quick-DASH.

Simple elbow dislocation

The elbow is the second most commonly dislocated major joint in adults. Good long-term outcomes have been reported after non-operative management; however, a small proportion (<10%) of patients have a poor outcome and some do require surgical intervention. A review of the anatomy, pathoanatomy, management and outcomes of simple elbow dislocations is presented. Emphasis is placed on emerging concepts regarding the soft tissue injury, the stabilising structures that are injured, the sequence and mechanism of injury and the relationship to elbow stability. The benefits of nonsurgical and surgical management are discussed and a treatment algorithm based on the pathoanatomy is proposed.

Assessment and decision making in the unstable elbow: management of simple dislocations

Simple elbow dislocations are usually treated conservatively. Radiographs are negative in simple dislocations. Results are generally good, although a small percentage of patients may develop chronic instability. Ligamentous repair can be indicated in high demand patients or if the elbow remains unstable following a closed reduction. Chronic instability is classified per their direction. Surgery is often indicated in the chronically unstable elbow.

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.