B Li1, P Shen, J-S Wang, G -B Wang, M He, L -H Bai. 1. Department of Joint Surgery and Sports Medicine, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University,Shenyang, China - lib@sj-hospital.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the patients who have to be in supine position for most of the time after posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction, the tibia tends to shift backwards due to the gravity of the lower leg and the tensed hamstring muscle. AIM: To observe the effects of tibial support braces on rehabilitation after PCL reconstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Inpatients. POPULATION: Thirty-nine patients were divided into regular brace (N.=18) and tibial support brace (N.=21) groups according to using different types of braces after PCL reconstruction. METHODS: The follow-up time was more than 2 years in all patients. The function of the affected knee joint was evaluated with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity rating, range of motion (ROM) and kneelax arthrometer before and after PCL reconstruction, respectively. RESULTS: The function of the affected knee joint was significantly improved in both groups after PCL reconstruction. Compared with regular brace group, postoperative Lysholm and IKDC scores were significantly increased in tibial support brace group (P<0.05). However, there were no statistical differences in Tegner activity rating and ROM between regular brace group and tibial support brace group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Tibial support brace can obtain better therapeutic effects for PCL reconstruction. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: This study suggests that compared with regular brace, tibial support brace can significantly improve the mechanical stability and functional outcomes of the affected knee after PCL reconstruction.
BACKGROUND: In the patients who have to be in supine position for most of the time after posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction, the tibia tends to shift backwards due to the gravity of the lower leg and the tensed hamstring muscle. AIM: To observe the effects of tibial support braces on rehabilitation after PCL reconstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Inpatients. POPULATION: Thirty-nine patients were divided into regular brace (N.=18) and tibial support brace (N.=21) groups according to using different types of braces after PCL reconstruction. METHODS: The follow-up time was more than 2 years in all patients. The function of the affected knee joint was evaluated with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity rating, range of motion (ROM) and kneelax arthrometer before and after PCL reconstruction, respectively. RESULTS: The function of the affected knee joint was significantly improved in both groups after PCL reconstruction. Compared with regular brace group, postoperative Lysholm and IKDC scores were significantly increased in tibial support brace group (P<0.05). However, there were no statistical differences in Tegner activity rating and ROM between regular brace group and tibial support brace group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Tibial support brace can obtain better therapeutic effects for PCL reconstruction. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: This study suggests that compared with regular brace, tibial support brace can significantly improve the mechanical stability and functional outcomes of the affected knee after PCL reconstruction.