Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 90-B, Issue SUPP_II, 349.  
Copyright © 2008 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Higgs, Z. C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Rymaszewski, L.A.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Higgs, Z. C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Rymaszewski, L.A.

British Elbow and Shoulder Society: PODIUM PRESENTATIONS - ELBOW


Edinburgh, Scotland: 31 May–2 June 2006

President: Tim Bunker


ELBOW ARTHROLYSIS FOR POST-TRAUMATIC STIFFNESS: A SINGLE SURGEON, SINGLE OBSERVER (PHYSIOTHERAPIST) STUDY

Z. C. J. Higgs; B. Danks; M. Sibinski; and L.A. Rymaszewski

Orthopaedic Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Castle Street, Glasgow, UK

Over the last 15 years there have been a series of publications reporting the beneficial effects of elbow arthrolysis, with considerable variation in operative technique and post-operative management.

Aim. To assess the results of open elbow arthrolysis in patients who did not receive any physiotherapy after discharge from hospital, although this is routinely prescribed by many surgeons.

Patients and Methods. Prospectively collected data of 34 patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year after arthrolysis was analysed. All the procedures were performed by the same surgeon, achieving as much improvement in elbow motion as possible at operation. All the patients had continuous brachial plexus blocks and continual passive motion for 2–3 days postoperatively but none received any physiotherapy after discharge. At review, a senior physiotherapist formally assessed all the patients, including measuring elbow motion with a goniometer.

Results. All patients’ arc of movement improved from, with mean elbow flexion increasing by 16 degrees and extension 20 degress at the last follow-up. Upper limb function, assessed with a Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (DASH), had improved 30%. Pain had decreased from 4.8 to 3.1 using the Visual Analogue Score. The greatest improvement in motion was obtained in the stiffest elbows – 5 patients with an arc of 30 degrees or less pre-operatively achieved an arc of 96 degrees by the time of the last review. Only early complications occurred – ulnar neuritis and significant pain – but these symptoms had largely settled by the time of the last review.

Conclusions. Good results of open arthrolysis for post-traumatic elbow stiffness can be achieved with continuous brachial plexus blocks and continual passive motion for 2–3 days post-operatively. There appears to be little evidence to support formal treatment with physiotherapy after discharge from hospital, as our results are similar to other reported series.

The abstracts were prepared by Cormac Kelly. Correspondence should be addressed to The Secretary, British Elbow and Shoulder Society, Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE






(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General