Mobilizing orthoses in the management of post-traumatic elbow contractures: A survey of Australian hand therapy practice.

STUDY

DESIGN

Mixed-methods survey.

INTRODUCTION

Elbow stiffness and contractures often develop after trauma. There is a lack of evidence on mobilizing orthoses and the factors guiding orthotic prescription.

PURPOSE OF STUDY: To investigate hand therapists' orthotic preferences for varying extension and flexion deficits, and describe the factors affecting orthotic choice for post-traumatic elbow contractures.

METHODS

103 members responded to the electronic survey via the Australian Hand Therapy Association mailing list. Five post-surgical scenarios were used to gather information regarding orthotic preferences, reasons and orthotic protocol: (1) week 8 with 55° extension deficit; (2) week 12 with 30° extension deficit; (3) week 12 with 55° extension deficit; (4) week 8 with flexion limited to 100°; (5) week 12 with limited flexion.

RESULTS

Most responders (89.9%) used mobilizing orthoses, predominantly for extension (88.5%). Orthotic preferences for scenarios 1 to 5 were (1) serial static (78.3%); (2) custom-made three-point static progressive (38.8%); (3) custom-made turnbuckle static progressive (33.8%); (4) "no orthosis" (27.9%); and (5) custom-made hinged (27.1%) and nonhinged (27.1%) dynamic. Choices were based on "effectiveness," "ease for patients to apply and wear," and "ease of fabrication/previous experience/comfortable with design." The recommended daily dosage for extension was 6 to 12 hour.

DISCUSSION: This is the first known study that reflects on the use of mobilizing orthoses in post-traumatic elbows in Australia.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobilizing orthoses are used routinely for post-traumatic elbows in Australia. Extension deficits are managed with serial static and static progressive orthoses at weeks 8 and 12, respectively. Research is needed to assess whether orthotic intervention before 12 weeks is beneficial in reducing contractures.