| Literature DB >> 26803783 |
Pim A D van Dijk1,2,3,4, Bart Lubberts5, Claire Verheul6,7,8, Christopher W DiGiovanni5, Gino M M J Kerkhoffs9,6,7.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the available evidence on rehabilitation programmes after operatively treated patients with peroneal tendon tearsand ruptures.Entities:
Keywords: Peroneal tendon; Physical therapy; Rehabilitation; Rupture; Tear; Tendon; Tendon healing
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26803783 PMCID: PMC4823352 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-015-3944-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc ISSN: 0942-2056 Impact factor: 4.342
Baseline characteristics
| Study | Study design | Treatment | NWB in weeks | WB (partial) in weeks | Start ROM (weeks) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arbab et al. [ | II | A, B, D | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Bare et al. [ | II | A, B | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| Berg et al. [ | III | D | 2 | 6 | – |
| Blitz and Nemes [ | III | B | 8 | 2 | 2 |
| Bonnin et al. [ | II | A | 0 | 6, 5 | – |
| Borland et al. [ | III | A | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| Borton et al. [ | III | C | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| Cerrato et al. [ | I | B, C | 2 | 4–6 | 2 |
| De Yoe et al. [ | III | A | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| Demetracopoulos et al. [ | II | A | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| Dombek et al. [ | II | A, B | 4–5 | 2–3 | 4 |
| Fujioka et al. [ | III | B | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Ho. et al. [ | III | A | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Jockel et al. [ | II | C | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Karlsson et al. [ | II | A | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Karlsson and Wiger [ | I | A | 0 | 6 | 2 |
| Krause and Brodsky [ | II | A, B | 5 | 1–8 | 5 |
| Lagoutaris et al. [ | III | A | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Lucas et al. [ | III | A | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Lui et al. [ | I | A | 4 | 0 | – |
| Maurer and Lehrman [ | III | B | 6 | 3 | 5 |
| III | B | 6 | 2 | 2 | |
| Madsen et al. [ | III | C + D | 8 | 0 | – |
| Minoyama et al. [ | III | A | 2 | 2 | – |
| Mook et al. [ | II | C | 4 | 2 | 3 |
| Ochoa et al. [ | III | A | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Ousema and Nunley [ | II | C | 2 | 10 | 6 |
| Ozer et al. [ | III | C | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Palmanovich et al. [ | III | A | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Patterson et al. [ | III | B | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Pelet et al. [ | III | D | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| Pelligrini et al. [ | III | C | 2 + 4 | 0 | 5 |
| Philbin et al. [ | I | A, B, C, D | 10 days + 4–6 weeks | 4–6 | 8 |
| Radice et al. [ | III | B | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Rapley et al. [ | II | C | 1 | 5 | 1 |
| Redfern and Myerson [ | II | B,C | 6 | 6–8 (max. 3 months) | 0 |
| Ritter et al. [ | I | A, B, C, D | 2 + 2 | 2 | 2–4 |
| Ross et al. [ | III | A | 2 | 3 | – |
| Sammarco [ | I | A, B | 2 | 2 | 3 |
| C | 4 | 2–3 | 6–7 | ||
| Sammarco [ | II | A | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| C | 4 | 2 | |||
| Saxena and Pham [ | II | A | 2–3 | 2 | 2 |
| Saxena and Wolf [ | II | B | 3 | 3 | 6 |
| Shoda et al. [ | III | A | 6 | 0 | – |
| Squires et al. [ | I | A, B, C | 6 | 4 | 3 |
| Stockton et al. [ | II | A, B | 4 | 4 + 4 | 12 |
| Vega et al. [ | I | A | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Verheyen et al. [ | III | D | 2 | 6 | – |
| Waldecker et al. [ | III | B | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| Wapner et al. [ | II | A, B, C | 0 | 3 | 3 |
Study design: I review/descriptive paper, II case series, III case report, treatment: A debridement with or without suturing, B tenodesis, C grafting, D end-to-end
aReported on both technique A and B. Since results from technique A are already reported in an prior study from the same author, only the results from technique B are included
Fig. 1PRISMA flow diagram [33]
Overview of the non-weight-bearing and weight-bearing immobilization period and the moment of start with Range of Motion per treatment group
| Group A: primary repair ( | Group B: tenodesis ( | Group C: grafting ( | Group D: end-to-end suturing ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total immobilization in weeks | Median 6.0 (range 0–12) | Median 7.0 (range 3.0–13) | Median 6.3 (range 3.0–13) | Median 8.0 (range 6.0–11) |
| NWB in weeks | Median 3.5 (range 0–6.4) | Median 4.3 (range 0–8.0) | Median 4.0 (range 0–8.0) | Median 4.0 (range 2.0–8.0) |
| WB in weeks | Median 2.3 (range 0–8.0) | Median 3.0 (range 0–8.0) | Median 2.8 (range 0–10) | Median 4.0 (range 0–6.0) |
| Start ROM in weeks |
|
|
|
|
| Median: 4.0 (range 2.0–12) | Median: 4.5 (range 0–12) | Median: 4.0 (range 0–12) | Median: 5.5 (range 2.0–8.0) |
NWB non-weight bearing, WB weight bearing, ROM range of motion
aNumber of studies that reported on the start of range of motion after surgery
Fig. 2Patient can start with active full ROM exercises: dorsiflexion, plantar flexion, inversion, eversion
Fig. 3Strength exercises: using the RSQ1 for electrical stimulation. In the second phase you can use this device during isometric or isotonic exercises
Fig. 4Proprioceptive training: progress from NWB/controlled WB on two legs to full WB on unstable surfaces
Fig. 5Single leg balance activities (stable to unstable surfaces, without and with distractions)
Fig. 6Strength exercises: eversion against theraband. This is one of the most important exercises
Fig. 7Training of the strength of the foot and calf muscles
Fig. 8Walking in an Alter-G trainer
Overview of the proposed rehabilitation protocol of surgically treated peroneal tendon disorders, based on the evaluation of available protocols in literature
| 0–2 weeksa | 2–4 weeksa | 6–8 weeksa | 8–12 weeksa | 12–24 weeksa | >24 weeksa | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight bearing: | ||||||
| 1. Non-weight bearing | x | |||||
| 2. Partial weight bearing | x | x | ||||
| 3. Full weight bearing | x | x | x | |||
| Active Range of Motion | x | |||||
| Strength exercises | x | |||||
| Proprioceptive training | x | x | ||||
| Eccentric/concentric exercises | x | x | ||||
| Isotonic exercises | x | x | ||||
| Running | x | x | ||||
| Sport specific training | x | |||||
| Provocation peroneal tendons | x |
aNumber of weeks after operation