» Articles » PMID: 30523369

Preoperative Range of Motion and Applications of Continuous Passive Motion Predict Outcomes After Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with Arthritis

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Date 2018 Dec 8
PMID 30523369
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of continuous passive motion (CPM) following knee arthroplasty and determined the predictors of effect sizes of range of motion (ROM) and functional outcomes in patients with knee arthritis.

Methods: A comprehensive electronic database search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), without publication year or language restrictions. The included RCTs were analyzed through meta-analysis and risk of bias assessment. Study methodological quality (MQ) was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Inverse-variance weighted univariate and multivariate metaregression analyses were performed to determine the predictors of treatment outcomes.

Results: A total of 77 RCTs with PEDro scores ranging from 6/10 to 8/10 were included. Meta-analyses revealed an overall significant favorable effect of CPM on treatment success rates [odds ratio: 3.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.21-6.00]. Significant immediate [postoperative day 14; standard mean difference (SMD): 1.06; 95% CI 0.61-1.51] and short-term (3-month follow-up; SMD: 0.80; 95% CI 0.45-1.15) effects on knee ROM and a long-term effect on function (12-month follow-up; SMD: 1.08; 95% CI 0.28-1.89) were observed. The preoperative ROM, postoperative day of CPM initiation, daily ROM increment, and total application days were significant independent predictors of CPM efficacy.

Conclusion: Early CPM initiation with rapid progress over a long duration of CPM application predicts higher treatment effect on knee ROM and function. The results were based on a moderate level of evidence, with good MQ and potential blinding biases in the included RCTs. An aggressive protocol of CPM has clinically relevant beneficial short-term and long-term effects on postoperative outcomes.

Level Of Evidence: II.

Citing Articles

Postoperative Continuous Passive Motion Does Not Improve the Range of Movement Achieved After Manipulation Under Anesthetic for Stiffness in Total Knee Replacement.

van Duren B, Lee K, Firth A, Imuetinyan E, Ilo K, Berber R Arthroplast Today. 2024; 27:101397.

PMID: 38882466 PMC: 11180303. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101397.


Rehabilitation Techniques Before and After Total Knee Arthroplasty for a Better Quality of Life.

Dutta S, Ambade R, Wankhade D, Agrawal P Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e54877.

PMID: 38533163 PMC: 10965116. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54877.


Clinical outcome and survival rate of condylar constrained knee prosthesis in revision total knee arthroplasty: an average nine point six year follow-up.

Yu M, Xu Y, Weng X, Feng B Int Orthop. 2024; 48(5):1179-1187.

PMID: 38353709 DOI: 10.1007/s00264-024-06096-6.


Continuous passive motion not affect the knee motion and the surgical wound aspect after total knee arthroplasty.

Gil-Gonzalez S, Barja-Rodriguez R, Lopez-Pujol A, Berjaoui H, Fernandez-Bengoa J, Erquicia J J Orthop Surg Res. 2022; 17(1):25.

PMID: 35033133 PMC: 8760645. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-02916-w.


Advanced rehabilitation technology in orthopaedics-a narrative review.

Kuroda Y, Young M, Shoman H, Punnoose A, Norrish A, Khanduja V Int Orthop. 2020; 45(8):1933-1940.

PMID: 33051693 PMC: 8338874. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-020-04814-4.


References
1.
ODriscoll S, Giori N . Continuous passive motion (CPM): theory and principles of clinical application. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000; 37(2):179-88. View

2.
MacDonald S, Bourne R, Rorabeck C, McCalden R, Kramer J, Vaz M . Prospective randomized clinical trial of continuous passive motion after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000; (380):30-5. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200011000-00005. View

3.
Lachiewicz P . The role of continuous passive motion after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000; (380):144-50. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200011000-00019. View

4.
Moseley A, Herbert R, Sherrington C, Maher C . Evidence for physiotherapy practice: a survey of the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Aust J Physiother. 2002; 48(1):43-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0004-9514(14)60281-6. View

5.
van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L . Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28(12):1290-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000065484.95996.AF. View