«Comparación entre la recuperación en domicilio y los programas de rehabilitación con supervisión fisioterapéutica después de la reconstrucción del ligamento anterior cruzado. Estudio clínico randomizado»
John A. Grant, MD, PhD*,, Nicholas G. H. Mohtadi, MD, MSc, FRCSC, Murray E. Maitland, PT, PhD and Ronald F. Zernicke, PhD
From the Sport Medicine Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, the School of Physical Therapy, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, and the Faculties of Kinesiology, Medicine, and Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Background: Because of health care funding and policy changes, there is a need to examine the effects of an evolution toward patient-directed (ie, home-based) rehabilitation programs on clinical outcomes of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Hypothesis: There will be no difference in the effectiveness of a home-based rehabilitation program and a standard physical therapysupervised rehabilitation program in patients 3 months after nonacute anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bonepatellar tendonbone grafts.
Study Design: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.
Methods: There were 145 patients (1659 years) who attended a presurgery education class. Home-based patients attended 4 physical therapy sessions, and physical therapysupervised patients attended 17 physical therapy sessions over the first 12 weeks after surgery. All patients followed the same standardized rehabilitation program. Study outcome measures included active-assisted knee flexion and passive knee extension range of motion, knee range of motion during walking, KT computerized arthrometer results, and isokinetic quadriceps and hamstrings strength. Patient outcomes were dichotomized as either clinically acceptable or unacceptable. Rehabilitation programs were compared by the proportion of acceptable patients in each group.
Results: The home-based group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with acceptable flexion and extension range of motion compared to the standard physical therapy group (flexion, 67% vs 47%; extension, 97% vs 83%). There were no significant differences between the groups in range of motion during walking, ligament laxity, and strength.
Conclusion: A structured, minimally supervised rehabilitation program was more effective in achieving acceptable knee range of motion in the first 3 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction than a standard physical therapybased program.
The American Journal of Sports Medicine 33:1288-1297 (2005).