Range of Motion Following Flexor Tendon Repair: Comparing Active Flexion and Extension With Passive Flexion Using Rubber Bands Followed by Active Extension

Markus Renberg,Jonas Svingen,Marianne Arner,Simon Farnebo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2024.08.003
2024-09-30
Abstract:Purpose: This study aimed to compare the outcome in terms of range of motion between early active flexion and extension (early active motion, [EAM]) and passive flexion using rubber bands followed by active extension (sometimes referred to as a Kleinert regimen) after flexor tendon repair in zones 1 and 2. Methods: Data were collected from the Swedish national health care registry for hand surgery (HAKIR). Rehabilitation regimens were decided by the preference of each caregiver. At 3 months, 828 digits (656 EAM and 172 passive flexion) and at 12 months, 448 digits (373 EAM and 75 passive flexion) were available for analysis. Thumbs were analyzed separately. Results: No notable difference in total active motion was found between the groups at 12 months of follow-up. Conclusions: This large registry study supports the hypothesis that EAM rehabilitation may not lead to better range of motion long-term than passive motion protocols. Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic IV.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?