A Comparison of Physical Therapy Protocols Between Open Latarjet Coracoid Transfer and Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

被引:9
|
作者
Beletsky, Alexander [1 ]
Cancienne, Jourdan M. [2 ]
Manderle, Brandon J. [1 ]
Mehta, Nabil [1 ]
Wilk, Kevin E. [3 ]
Verma, Nikhil N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Rush Univ, Med Ctr, Div Sports Med, Midwest Orthopaed Rush, 1611 West Harrison St,Suite 300, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
[2] Southern Orthopaed Specialists New Orleans, New Orleans, LA USA
[3] Amer Sports Med Inst, Champ Sports Med, Birmingham, AL USA
来源
SPORTS HEALTH-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH | 2020年 / 12卷 / 02期
关键词
Latarjet; Bankart; rehabilitation; return to sport; shoulder instability; REHABILITATION GUIDELINE; SHOULDER INSTABILITY; AMERICAN SOCIETY; BONE;
D O I
10.1177/1941738119887396
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Context: Recent studies examining return to sport after traumatic shoulder instability suggest faster return-to-sport time lines after bony stabilization when compared with soft tissue stabilization. The purpose of the current study was to define variability across online Latarjet rehabilitation protocols and to compare Latarjet with Bankart repair rehabilitation time lines. Evidence Acquisition: Online searches were utilized to identify publicly available rehabilitation protocols from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited academic orthopaedic surgery programs. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Results: Of the 183 ACGME-accredited orthopaedic programs reviewed, 14 institutions (7.65%) had publicly available rehabilitation protocols. A web-based search yielded 17 additional protocols from private sports medicine practices. Of the 31 protocols included, 31 (100%) recommended postoperative sling use and 26 (84%) recommended elbow, wrist, and hand range of motion exercises. Full passive forward flexion goals averaged 3.22 +/- 2.38 weeks postoperatively, active range of motion began on average at 5.22 +/- 1.28 weeks, and normal scapulothoracic motion by 9.26 +/- 4.8 weeks postoperatively. Twenty (65%) protocols provided specific recommendations for return to nonoverhead sport-specific activities, beginning at an average of 17 +/- 2.8 weeks postoperatively. This was compared with overhead sports or throwing activities, for which 18 (58%) of protocols recommended beginning at a similar average of 17.1 +/- 3.3 weeks. Conclusion: Similar to Bankart repair protocols, Latarjet rehabilitation protocols contain a high degree of variability with regard to exercises and motion goal recommendations. However, many milestones and start dates occur earlier in Latarjet protocols when compared with Bankart-specific protocols. Consequently, variability in the timing of rehabilitation goals may contribute to earlier return to play metrics identified in the broader literature for the Latarjet procedure when compared with arthroscopic Bankart repair. Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT): Level C.
引用
收藏
页码:124 / 131
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Physical Therapy Protocols for Arthroscopic Bankart Repair
    DeFroda, Steven F.
    Mehta, Nabil
    Owens, Brett D.
    SPORTS HEALTH-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH, 2018, 10 (03): : 250 - 258
  • [2] Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet for Failed Primary Arthroscopic Stabilization With Subcritical Bone Loss
    Calvo, Emilio
    Luengo, Gonzalo
    Morcillo, Diana
    Foruria, Antonio M.
    Valencia, Maria
    ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2021, 9 (05)
  • [3] Association Between Preoperative Glenoid Bone Loss and Postoperative Outcomes After Coracoid Transfer Combined With Open Bankart Repair: Comparison of the Bristow and Latarjet Techniques
    Hirose, Takehito
    Tanaka, Makoto
    Nakai, Hidekazu
    Hanai, Hiroto
    Kotani, Yuki
    Kuratani, Kosuke
    Hayashida, Kenji
    ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2023, 11 (05)
  • [4] Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
    Hurley, Eoghan T.
    Davey, Martin S.
    Montgomery, Connor
    O'Doherty, Ross
    Gaafar, Mohamed
    Pauzenberger, Leo
    Mullett, Hannan
    ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2021, 9 (09)
  • [5] Outcomes of Arthroscopic Latarjet as a Revision Surgery After Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Repair
    Calvo, Emilio
    Dzidzishvili, Lika
    Valencia, Maria
    Calvo, Claudio
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2024, 52 (01) : 190 - 200
  • [6] A Cost-Minimization Analysis of Intraoperative Costs in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair, Open Latarjet, and Distal Tibial Allograft
    Uffmann, William J.
    Christensen, Garrett, V
    Yoo, Minkyoung
    Nelson, Richard E.
    Greis, Patrick E.
    Burks, Robert T.
    Tashjian, Robert Z.
    Chalmers, Peter N.
    ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2019, 7 (11)
  • [7] The cost-effectiveness of the arthroscopic Bankart versus open Latarjet in the treatment of primary shoulder instability
    Min, Kyong
    Fedorka, Catherine
    Solberg, Muriel J.
    Shaha, Steven H.
    Higgins, Laurence D.
    JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2018, 27 (06) : S2 - S9
  • [8] Comparison of Coracoid Graft Position and Fixation in the Open Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet Techniques: A Cadaveric Study
    Minuesa-Asensio, Alvaro
    Garcia-Esteo, Francisco
    Merida-Velasco, Jose Ramon
    Barrio-Asensio, Carmen
    Lopez-Fernandez, Pedro
    Aramberri-Gutierrez, Mikel
    Murillo-Gonzalez, Jorge
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2020, 48 (09) : 2105 - 2114
  • [9] Biomechanical Comparison of Open and Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedures
    Schulze-Borges, Johanna
    Agneskirchner, Jens D.
    Bobrowitsch, Evgenij
    Patzer, Thilo
    Struck, Melena
    Smith, Tomas
    Wellmann, Mathias
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2013, 29 (04) : 630 - 637
  • [10] Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for First-Time Dislocators in Athletes
    Hurley, Eoghan T.
    Davey, Martin S.
    Montgomery, Connor
    O'Doherty, Ross
    Gaafar, Mohamed
    Pauzenberger, Leo
    Mullett, Hannan
    ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2021, 9 (08)