Rehabilitation for ankle fractures in adults.

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD005595.pub4
Sharon R Lewis, Michael W Pritchard, Roses Parker, Henry KC Searle, Paula R Beckenkamp, David J Keene, Chris Bretherton, Chung-Wei Christine Lin
{"title":"Rehabilitation for ankle fractures in adults.","authors":"Sharon R Lewis, Michael W Pritchard, Roses Parker, Henry KC Searle, Paula R Beckenkamp, David J Keene, Chris Bretherton, Chung-Wei Christine Lin","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD005595.pub4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ankle fracture is one of the most common lower limb fractures. Whilst immobilisation of the ankle can support and protect the fracture site during early healing, this also increases the risk of ankle weakness, stiffness, and residual pain. Rehabilitation aims to address the after-effects of this injury, to improve ankle function and quality of life. Approaches are wide-ranging and include strategies to improve ankle joint movement, muscle strength, or both. This is an update of a Cochrane review last published in 2012.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the effects of rehabilitation interventions following surgical or non-surgical management of ankle fractures in adults.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trials registers in May 2022, and conducted additional searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in March 2023. We also searched reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any rehabilitation intervention delivered to adults with ankle fracture. Interventions could have been given during or after the initial fracture management period (typically the first six weeks after injury), which may or may not have included surgical fixation. We excluded participants with multi-trauma, pathological fracture, or with established complications secondary to ankle fracture.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for five outcomes: activity limitation (ankle function), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), participant satisfaction with treatment, pain, and adverse events (we focused on re-operation, defined as unplanned return to theatre). We report the findings up to six months after injury.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included 53 studies (45 RCTs, 8 quasi-RCTs) with 4489 adults with ankle fracture. In most studies, orthopaedic management included surgical fixation but was non-surgical in five studies, and either surgical or non-surgical in six studies. Here, we summarise the findings for three common rehabilitation comparisons; these included the most data and were the most clinically relevant. Because of different intervention approaches, we sometimes included a study in more than one comparison. Data for other less common comparisons were also available but often included few participants and were imprecise. All studies were unavoidably at high risk of performance and detection bias. We downgraded the certainty of all evidence for this reason. We also downgraded for imprecision and when we noted inconsistencies between studies that precluded meta-analysis of data. Early (within 3 weeks of surgery) versus delayed weight-bearing (12 studies, 1403 participants) Early weight-bearing probably leads to better ankle function (mean difference (MD) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35 to 5.78; 5 studies, 890 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however, this does not include a clinically meaningful difference. Early weight-bearing may offer little or no difference to HRQoL compared to delayed weight-bearing (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.30; 5 studies, 739 participants; low-certainty evidence); when translated to the EQ-5D scale (a commonly-used HRQoL questionnaire), any small difference was not clinically important. We were unsure whether there were any differences in participant satisfaction or pain because these outcomes had very low-certainty evidence. For adverse events, there may be little or no difference in re-operation (risk ratio (RR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.68; 7 studies, 1007 participants; low-certainty evidence). Removable versus non-removable ankle support (25 studies, 2206 participants) Following surgery, using a removable ankle support may lead to better ankle function (MD 6.39, 95% CI 1.69 to 11.09; 6 studies, 677 participants; low-certainty evidence). This effect included both a clinically important and unimportant difference. There is probably an improvement in HRQoL with a removable ankle support, although this difference included both a clinically important and unimportant difference when translated to the EQ-5D scale (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.50; 3 studies, 477 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported participant satisfaction. We were unsure of the effects on pain because of very low-certainty evidence (1 study, 29 participants). There may be little or no difference in re-operations (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.71; 6 studies, 624 participants; low-certainty evidence). Following non-surgical management, there may be little or no difference between removable and non-removable ankle supports in ankle function (MD 1.08, 95% CI -3.18 to 5.34; 3 studies, 399 participants), and HRQoL (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.15; 3 studies, 397 participants); low-certainty evidence. No studies reported participant satisfaction. We were unsure of the effects on pain (2 studies, 167 participants), or re-operation because of very low-certainty evidence (1 study, 305 participants). Physical therapy interventions versus usual care or other physical therapy interventions (9 studies, 857 participants) Types of interventions included the use of active controlled motion, a spring-loaded ankle trainer, an antigravity treadmill, and variations of enhanced physiotherapy (e.g. additional stretching, joint mobilisation, neuromuscular exercises), delivered during or after the initial fracture management period. We were unable to pool data because of the differences in the design of interventions and their usual care comparators. Studies often included very few participants. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison was very low, and therefore we were unsure of the effectiveness of these therapies. No studies in this comparison reported re-operation.</p><p><strong>Authors' conclusions: </strong>Early weight-bearing may improve outcomes in the first six months after surgery for ankle fracture, but the difference is likely to be small and may not always be clinically important. A removable ankle support may also provide a better outcome, but again, the difference may not always be clinically important. It is likely that neither approach increases the re-operation risk. We assume that the findings for these comparisons are applicable to people with closed ankle fractures, and that satisfactory fracture stabilisation had been achieved with surgery. For people who have non-surgical treatment, there is no evidence that either a removable or non-removable ankle support may be superior. We were uncertain whether any physical therapy interventions were more effective than usual care or other physical therapy interventions. We encourage investigators of future studies on rehabilitation interventions for ankle fracture to use a core outcome set.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"9 ","pages":"CD005595"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418975/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005595.pub4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ankle fracture is one of the most common lower limb fractures. Whilst immobilisation of the ankle can support and protect the fracture site during early healing, this also increases the risk of ankle weakness, stiffness, and residual pain. Rehabilitation aims to address the after-effects of this injury, to improve ankle function and quality of life. Approaches are wide-ranging and include strategies to improve ankle joint movement, muscle strength, or both. This is an update of a Cochrane review last published in 2012.

Objectives: To assess the effects of rehabilitation interventions following surgical or non-surgical management of ankle fractures in adults.

Search methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trials registers in May 2022, and conducted additional searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in March 2023. We also searched reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any rehabilitation intervention delivered to adults with ankle fracture. Interventions could have been given during or after the initial fracture management period (typically the first six weeks after injury), which may or may not have included surgical fixation. We excluded participants with multi-trauma, pathological fracture, or with established complications secondary to ankle fracture.

Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for five outcomes: activity limitation (ankle function), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), participant satisfaction with treatment, pain, and adverse events (we focused on re-operation, defined as unplanned return to theatre). We report the findings up to six months after injury.

Main results: We included 53 studies (45 RCTs, 8 quasi-RCTs) with 4489 adults with ankle fracture. In most studies, orthopaedic management included surgical fixation but was non-surgical in five studies, and either surgical or non-surgical in six studies. Here, we summarise the findings for three common rehabilitation comparisons; these included the most data and were the most clinically relevant. Because of different intervention approaches, we sometimes included a study in more than one comparison. Data for other less common comparisons were also available but often included few participants and were imprecise. All studies were unavoidably at high risk of performance and detection bias. We downgraded the certainty of all evidence for this reason. We also downgraded for imprecision and when we noted inconsistencies between studies that precluded meta-analysis of data. Early (within 3 weeks of surgery) versus delayed weight-bearing (12 studies, 1403 participants) Early weight-bearing probably leads to better ankle function (mean difference (MD) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35 to 5.78; 5 studies, 890 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however, this does not include a clinically meaningful difference. Early weight-bearing may offer little or no difference to HRQoL compared to delayed weight-bearing (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.30; 5 studies, 739 participants; low-certainty evidence); when translated to the EQ-5D scale (a commonly-used HRQoL questionnaire), any small difference was not clinically important. We were unsure whether there were any differences in participant satisfaction or pain because these outcomes had very low-certainty evidence. For adverse events, there may be little or no difference in re-operation (risk ratio (RR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.68; 7 studies, 1007 participants; low-certainty evidence). Removable versus non-removable ankle support (25 studies, 2206 participants) Following surgery, using a removable ankle support may lead to better ankle function (MD 6.39, 95% CI 1.69 to 11.09; 6 studies, 677 participants; low-certainty evidence). This effect included both a clinically important and unimportant difference. There is probably an improvement in HRQoL with a removable ankle support, although this difference included both a clinically important and unimportant difference when translated to the EQ-5D scale (SMD 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.50; 3 studies, 477 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported participant satisfaction. We were unsure of the effects on pain because of very low-certainty evidence (1 study, 29 participants). There may be little or no difference in re-operations (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.71; 6 studies, 624 participants; low-certainty evidence). Following non-surgical management, there may be little or no difference between removable and non-removable ankle supports in ankle function (MD 1.08, 95% CI -3.18 to 5.34; 3 studies, 399 participants), and HRQoL (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.15; 3 studies, 397 participants); low-certainty evidence. No studies reported participant satisfaction. We were unsure of the effects on pain (2 studies, 167 participants), or re-operation because of very low-certainty evidence (1 study, 305 participants). Physical therapy interventions versus usual care or other physical therapy interventions (9 studies, 857 participants) Types of interventions included the use of active controlled motion, a spring-loaded ankle trainer, an antigravity treadmill, and variations of enhanced physiotherapy (e.g. additional stretching, joint mobilisation, neuromuscular exercises), delivered during or after the initial fracture management period. We were unable to pool data because of the differences in the design of interventions and their usual care comparators. Studies often included very few participants. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison was very low, and therefore we were unsure of the effectiveness of these therapies. No studies in this comparison reported re-operation.

Authors' conclusions: Early weight-bearing may improve outcomes in the first six months after surgery for ankle fracture, but the difference is likely to be small and may not always be clinically important. A removable ankle support may also provide a better outcome, but again, the difference may not always be clinically important. It is likely that neither approach increases the re-operation risk. We assume that the findings for these comparisons are applicable to people with closed ankle fractures, and that satisfactory fracture stabilisation had been achieved with surgery. For people who have non-surgical treatment, there is no evidence that either a removable or non-removable ankle support may be superior. We were uncertain whether any physical therapy interventions were more effective than usual care or other physical therapy interventions. We encourage investigators of future studies on rehabilitation interventions for ankle fracture to use a core outcome set.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成人踝关节骨折的康复治疗。
背景:踝关节骨折是最常见的下肢骨折之一:踝关节骨折是最常见的下肢骨折之一。在早期愈合期间,固定踝关节可以支撑和保护骨折部位,但这也增加了踝关节无力、僵硬和残余疼痛的风险。康复治疗旨在消除这种损伤的后遗症,改善踝关节功能和生活质量。方法多种多样,包括改善踝关节运动、肌肉力量或两者兼而有之的策略。本文是对 2012 年发表的 Cochrane 综述的更新:评估成人踝关节骨折手术或非手术治疗后康复干预的效果:我们于 2022 年 5 月检索了 CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、其他三个数据库和两个临床试验登记册,并于 2023 年 3 月对 CENTRAL、MEDLINE 和 Embase 进行了额外检索。我们还检索了纳入研究的参考文献目录和相关的系统综述:我们纳入了随机对照试验 (RCT) 和准 RCT,这些试验比较了为踝关节骨折成人患者提供的任何康复干预措施。干预措施可能是在最初的骨折处理期间或之后(通常是受伤后的前六周)进行的,可能包括也可能不包括手术固定。我们排除了有多处创伤、病理性骨折或踝关节骨折继发并发症的参与者:我们采用了 Cochrane 规定的标准方法程序。我们收集了五项结果的数据:活动受限(踝关节功能)、健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)、参与者对治疗的满意度、疼痛和不良事件(我们重点关注再次手术,即计划外重返手术室)。我们报告了受伤后六个月内的研究结果:我们纳入了 53 项研究(45 项 RCT,8 项准 RCT),涉及 4489 名踝关节骨折的成年人。在大多数研究中,骨科治疗包括手术固定,但有 5 项研究采用非手术治疗,有 6 项研究采用手术或非手术治疗。在此,我们总结了三项常见的康复对比研究结果;这些研究包含的数据最多,也最具有临床意义。由于干预方法不同,我们有时会将一项研究纳入多个比较中。其他一些不太常见的对比研究也有数据,但通常参与者较少且不精确。所有研究都不可避免地存在较高的绩效和检测偏倚风险。因此,我们降低了所有证据的确定性。当我们发现研究之间存在不一致,导致无法对数据进行荟萃分析时,我们也会因不精确性而将其降级。早期(术后 3 周内)负重与延迟负重(12 项研究,1403 名参与者) 早期负重可能会改善踝关节功能(平均差异 (MD) 3.56,95% 置信区间 (CI) 1.35 至 5.78;5 项研究,890 名参与者;中度确定性证据);但是,这并不包括有临床意义的差异。与延迟负重相比,早期负重对 HRQoL 的影响可能很小或没有影响(标准化平均差异 (SMD) 0.15,95% 置信区间 (CI) -0.01 至 0.30;5 项研究,739 名参与者;低度确定性证据);当转化为 EQ-5D 量表(常用的 HRQoL 问卷)时,任何微小的差异都不具有临床意义。我们无法确定参与者的满意度或疼痛感是否存在差异,因为这些结果的证据确定性很低。在不良事件方面,再次手术的差异可能很小或没有差异(风险比 (RR) 0.50,95% CI 0.09 至 2.68;7 项研究,1007 名参与者;低确定性证据)。可拆卸与不可拆卸踝关节支撑(25 项研究,2206 名参与者) 手术后,使用可拆卸踝关节支撑可能会改善踝关节功能(MD 6.39,95% CI 1.69 至 11.09;6 项研究,677 名参与者;低确定性证据)。该效应包括临床重要差异和不重要差异。使用可拆卸式踝关节支撑可能会改善患者的 HRQoL,尽管在转换为 EQ-5D 量表时,这种差异既包括临床上重要的差异,也包括不重要的差异(SMD 0.30,95% CI 0.11 至 0.50;3 项研究,477 名参与者;中度确定性证据)。没有研究报告了参与者的满意度。由于证据的确定性很低(1 项研究,29 名参与者),我们无法确定对疼痛的影响。再次手术方面可能差别不大或没有差别(RR 1.20,95% CI 0.39 至 3.71;6 项研究,624 名参与者;低度确定性证据)。非手术治疗后,可拆卸和不可拆卸的踝关节支撑在踝关节功能(MD 1.08,95% CI -3.18至5.34;3项研究,399名参与者)和HRQoL(SMD -0.04,95% CI -0.24至0.15;3项研究,397名参与者)方面可能差异很小或没有差异;低确定性证据。没有研究报告参与者的满意度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
2.40%
发文量
173
审稿时长
1-2 weeks
期刊介绍: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.
期刊最新文献
Glucocorticoid facet joint injection for chronic back or neck pain. Methylxanthines for the prevention or treatment of intermittent hypoxemia or respiratory insufficiency in late preterm infants. Omega-3 fatty acid supplementation for depression in children and adolescents. Calcium supplementation (other than for preventing or treating hypertension) for improving pregnancy and infant outcomes. Minimizing blood sampling in preterm infants.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1