gms | German Medical Science

14th Triennial Congress of the International Federation of Societies for Surgery of the Hand (IFSSH), 11th Triennial Congress of the International Federation of Societies for Hand Therapy (IFSHT)

17.06. - 21.06.2019, Berlin

Artikel

Artikel empfehlen

Return to work after flexor tendon injury in Zone I, II and III: Early passive motion versus controlled active motion – a cross sectional study

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • presenting/speaker Tamara Hauri - University Hospital, Therapy Department, Zürich, Switzerland
  • Ann-Helen Patomella - Karolinska Institutet, Division of Occupational Therapy, Stockholm, Sweden
  • Vera Beckmann-Fries - University Hospital, Therapy Departement, Zürich, Switzerland
  • Christine Meier - University Hospital, Therapy Departement, Zürich, Switzerland
  • Maurizio Calcagni - University Hospital, Department of Surgery, Division of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Zürich, Switzerland

International Federation of Societies for Surgery of the Hand. International Federation of Societies for Hand Therapy. 14th Triennial Congress of the International Federation of Societies for Surgery of the Hand (IFSSH), 11th Triennial Congress of the International Federation of Societies for Hand Therapy (IFSHT), 11th Triennial Congress of the International Federation of Societies for Hand Therapy (IFSHT). Berlin, 17.-21.06.2019. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2020. DocIFSHT19-1268

doi: 10.3205/19ifssh1565, urn:nbn:de:0183-19ifssh15659

Veröffentlicht: 6. Februar 2020

© 2020 Hauri et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung). Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Gliederung

Text

Objective: To compare outcomes of two rehabilitation protocols; EPM and CAM after flexor tendon injury regarding time to return to work (TTRTW), the total active motion (TAM), grip strength, rupture rate and number of therapy sessions.

Materials and Methods: T-test or the Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the outcome for the two protocols. The significance level was set to less than .05.

Results: There were 79 patients with 88 injured fingers in the EPM group, and 72 patients with 80 injured fingers in the CAM group. No statistically significant difference was found in TTRTW between the two groups EPM and CAM (95.4 days versus 89.2 days, p= .74). White-collar workers have a significant earlier return to part-time work with 23.8 days compared to 42.3 days (p= .028) if treated with the CAM. With regards to TAM, the CAM group was significantly better (p= .001) with 205°compared to 183° in the EPM group.

Conclusions: The white-collar workers benefit from the CAM protocol with an earlier return to part-time work, higher TAM score and fewer required therapy sessions. Overall, the patients treated with the CAM had a higher TAM score.