Rehabilitation Variability After Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction

摘要

Background: Investigations specifically delineating the safest and most efficacious components of physical therapy after ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstruction of the elbow are lacking. As such, while a number of recommendations regarding postoperative therapy have been published, no validated rehabilitation guidelines currently exist. Purpose: To assess the variability of rehabilitation protocols utilized by orthopaedic residency programs in the United States (US) and those described in the scientific literature. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Online UCL reconstruction rehabilitation protocols from US orthopaedic programs and from the scientific literature were reviewed. A comprehensive scoring rubric was developed to assess each protocol for the presence of various rehabilitation components as well as the timing of their introduction. Results: Overall, 22 protocols (14%) from 155 US Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) orthopaedic programs and 8 protocols published in the scientific literature detailing UCL reconstruction postoperative rehabilitation were identified and reviewed. After reconstruction, the majority of ERAS and review article protocols (77% and 88%, respectively) advised immediate splinting at 90° of elbow flexion. The mean time to splint discontinuation across all protocols was 2.0 weeks (range, 1-3 weeks). There was considerable variability in elbow range of motion recommendations; however, most protocols detailed goals for full extension and full flexion (&130°) at a mean 5.3 weeks (range, 4-6 weeks) and 5.5 weeks (range, 4-6 weeks), respectively. Significant diversity in the inclusion and timing of strengthening, proprioceptive, and throwing exercises was also apparent. Thirteen ERAS (59%) and 7 review article (88%) protocols specifically mentioned return to competition as an endpoint. ERAS protocols permitted return to competition significantly earlier than review article protocols (29.6 vs 39.0 weeks, respectively; P = .042). Conclusion: There is notable variability in both the composition and timing of rehabilitation components across a small number of protocols available online. While our understanding of postoperative rehabilitation for UCL reconstruction evolves, outcome-based studies focused on identifying clinically beneficial modalities and metrics are necessary to enable meaningful standardization.