Dynamic Splinting After Total Knee Arthroplasty
Dynamic Splinting After Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Randomized, Controlled Trial
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Arizona
-
Mesa, Arizona, United States, 85206
- Dennis L Armstrong M.D.
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Reduced flexibility in AROM of knee extension
- Pain that is worsened by bending over while legs are straight
- Impaired gait pattern
- Ability to understand informed consent and experiment responsibilities
Exclusion Criteria:
- Fractures
- Knee sepsis
- Osteomyelitis or any orthopedic infection
- Extensor mechanism dysfunction
- Psoriasis
- Knee joint neuropathy
- Previous Stroke or Brain Injury
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
No Intervention: 1
Patient will receive post-surgical standard of care treatment with standard Physical therapy and NSAIDs.
|
|
|
Experimental: 2
Patients will be treated with the Standard of Care physical therapy and NSAIDs as well as a Knee Extension Dynasplint that includes tension chambers.
|
Dynamic Splinting utilizes the protocols of Low-Load, Prolonged-Duration Stretch (LLPS) with calibrated, adjustable tension to increase the Total End Range Time (TERT) to reduce contracture.
The Knee Extension Dynasplint for the Experimental group will have tension chambers delivering therapeutic treatment from the device.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
Change in Maximal Acitive Range of Mothion in knee extension
Time Frame: 9 weeks
|
9 weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Denis M, Moffet H, Caron F, Ouellet D, Paquet J, Nolet L. Effectiveness of continuous passive motion and conventional physical therapy after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2006 Feb;86(2):174-85.
- Scuderi GR, Kochhar T. Management of flexion contracture in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007 Jun;22(4 Suppl 1):20-4. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.12.110.
- Kotani A, Yonekura A, Bourne RB. Factors influencing range of motion after contemporary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2005 Oct;20(7):850-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.12.051.
- Jansen CM, Windau JE, Bonutti PM, Brillhart MV. Treatment of a knee contracture using a knee orthosis incorporating stress-relaxation techniques. Phys Ther. 1996 Feb;76(2):182-6. doi: 10.1093/ptj/76.2.182.
- Fitzgerald GK, Childs JD, Ridge TM, Irrgang JJ. Agility and perturbation training for a physically active individual with knee osteoarthritis. Phys Ther. 2002 Apr;82(4):372-82.
- Laskin RS, Beksac B. Stiffness after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2004 Jun;19(4 Suppl 1):41-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.02.008.
- Bourne RB, Laskin RS, Guerin JS. Ten-year results of the first 100 Genesis II total knee replacement procedures. Orthopedics. 2007 Aug;30(8 Suppl):83-5.
- Bradbury N, Borton D, Spoo G, Cross MJ. Participation in sports after total knee replacement. Am J Sports Med. 1998 Jul-Aug;26(4):530-5. doi: 10.1177/03635465980260041001.
- Cloutier JM, Sabouret P, Deghrar A. Total knee arthroplasty with retention of both cruciate ligaments. A nine to eleven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999 May;81(5):697-702. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199905000-00011.
- Kawamura H, Bourne RB. Factors affecting range of flexion after total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2001;6(3):248-52. doi: 10.1007/s007760100043.
- Kahle JT, Highsmith MJ, Hubbard SL. Comparison of nonmicroprocessor knee mechanism versus C-Leg on Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire, stumbles, falls, walking tests, stair descent, and knee preference. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45(1):1-14. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2007.04.0054.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (Anticipated)
Primary Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 2008.009
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.