Benedikt J Braun1, Nils T Veith2, Mika Rollmann2, Marcel Orth2, Tobias Fritz2, Steven C Herath2, Jörg H Holstein2, Tim Pohlemann2. 1. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Saarland University Hospital, Building 57, Kirrbergerstr. 1, 66421, Homburg, Germany. benedikt.braun@uks.eu. 2. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Saarland University Hospital, Building 57, Kirrbergerstr. 1, 66421, Homburg, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Rehabilitation after lower-extremity fractures is based on the physicians' recommendation for non-, partial-, or full weight-bearing. Clinical studies rely on this assumption, but continuous compliance or objective loading rates are unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the compliance to weight-bearing recommendations by introducing a novel, pedobarography system continuously registering postoperative ground forces into ankle, tibial shaft and proximal femur fracture aftercare and test its feasibility for this purpose. METHODS: In this prospective, observational study, a continuously measuring pedobarography insole was placed in the patients shoe during the immediate post-operative aftercare after ankle, tibial shaft and intertrochanteric femur fractures. Weight-bearing was ordered as per the institutional standard and controlled by physical therapy. The insole was retrieved after a maximum of six weeks (28 days [range 5-42 days]). Non-compliance was defined as a failure to maintain, or reach the ordered weight-bearing within 30%. RESULTS: Overall 30 patients were included in the study. Fourteen (47%) of the patients were compliant to the weight-bearing recommendations. Within two weeks after surgery patients deviated from the recommendation by over 50%. Sex, age and weight did not influence the performance (p > 0.05). Ankle fracture patients (partial weight-bearing) showed a significantly increased deviation from the recommendation (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study results show that, despite physical therapy training, weight-bearing compliance to recommended limits was low. Adherence to the partial weight-bearing task was further decreased over time. Uncontrolled weight-bearing recommendations should thus be viewed with caution and carefully considered as fiction. The presented insole is feasible to determine weight bearing continuously, could immediately help define real-time patient behaviour and establish realistic, individual weight-bearing recommendations.
PURPOSE: Rehabilitation after lower-extremity fractures is based on the physicians' recommendation for non-, partial-, or full weight-bearing. Clinical studies rely on this assumption, but continuous compliance or objective loading rates are unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the compliance to weight-bearing recommendations by introducing a novel, pedobarography system continuously registering postoperative ground forces into ankle, tibial shaft and proximal femur fracture aftercare and test its feasibility for this purpose. METHODS: In this prospective, observational study, a continuously measuring pedobarography insole was placed in the patients shoe during the immediate post-operative aftercare after ankle, tibial shaft and intertrochanteric femur fractures. Weight-bearing was ordered as per the institutional standard and controlled by physical therapy. The insole was retrieved after a maximum of six weeks (28 days [range 5-42 days]). Non-compliance was defined as a failure to maintain, or reach the ordered weight-bearing within 30%. RESULTS: Overall 30 patients were included in the study. Fourteen (47%) of the patients were compliant to the weight-bearing recommendations. Within two weeks after surgery patients deviated from the recommendation by over 50%. Sex, age and weight did not influence the performance (p > 0.05). Ankle fracturepatients (partial weight-bearing) showed a significantly increased deviation from the recommendation (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study results show that, despite physical therapy training, weight-bearing compliance to recommended limits was low. Adherence to the partial weight-bearing task was further decreased over time. Uncontrolled weight-bearing recommendations should thus be viewed with caution and carefully considered as fiction. The presented insole is feasible to determine weight bearing continuously, could immediately help define real-time patient behaviour and establish realistic, individual weight-bearing recommendations.
Authors: Michael C Fu; Levi DeLuke; Rafael A Buerba; Richard E Fan; Ying Jean Zheng; Michael P Leslie; Michael R Baumgaertner; Jonathan N Grauer Journal: Orthopedics Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 1.390
Authors: Akke Bakker; Taco J Blokhuis; Michelle D M E Meeks; Hermie J Hermens; Herman R Holtslag Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 2.912
Authors: D S Elliott; K J H Newman; D P Forward; D M Hahn; B Ollivere; K Kojima; R Handley; N D Rossiter; J J Wixted; R M Smith; C G Moran Journal: Bone Joint J Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 5.082
Authors: Attila Vasarhelyi; Tobias Baumert; Christoph Fritsch; Werner Hopfenmüller; Georg Gradl; Thomas Mittlmeier Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 2.840
Authors: Bogdan Deleanu; Radu Prejbeanu; Dan Crisan; Vlad Predescu; Iulian Popa; Dan V Poenaru Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Anne M Moseley; Catherine Sherrington; Stephen R Lord; Elizabeth Barraclough; Rebecca J St George; Ian D Cameron Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2008-11-18 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Benedikt J Braun; Patrick Pelz; Nils T Veith; Mika Rollmann; Moritz Klein; Steven C Herath; Jörg H Holstein; Tim Pohlemann Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-01-02 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Meir T Marmor; Bernd Grimm; Andrew M Hanflik; Peter H Richter; Sureshan Sivananthan; Seth Robert Yarboro; Benedikt J Braun Journal: Indian J Orthop Date: 2022-04-09 Impact factor: 1.033
Authors: Johannes Gleich; Daniel Pfeufer; Alexander M Keppler; Stefan Mehaffey; Julian Fürmetz; Wolfgang Böcker; Christian Kammerlander; Carl Neuerburg Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2021-01-23 Impact factor: 2.928
Authors: Diederik Pieter Johan Smeeing; Roderick Marijn Houwert; Jan Paul Briet; Rolf Hendrik Herman Groenwold; Koen Willem Wouter Lansink; Luke Petrus Hendrikus Leenen; Peer van der Zwaal; Jochem Maarten Hoogendoorn; Mark van Heijl; Egbert Jan Verleisdonk; Michiel Joseph Marie Segers; Falco Hietbrink Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 3.693
Authors: Alexander Maximilian Eickhoff; Raffael Cintean; Carina Fiedler; Florian Gebhard; Konrad Schütze; Peter H Richter Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2020-09-03 Impact factor: 3.067