Abstract
There is no consensus on the most effective rehabilitation regimen following extensor
tendon repair of the hand. This systematic review evaluates the outcomes of the various
regimens. The Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro, OTseeker databases were
searched for any prospective randomised clinical trials comparing rehabilitation regimens
for acute extensor tendon injuries in adults. Five papers met the inclusion criteria.
The regimens were static immobilisation, dynamic splinting and early active motion
(EAM). There was no standard format of reporting. The sample size ranged from 27 to
100 patients. The duration of follow-up ranged from 8 to 24 weeks. Overall, patients’
total active motion improved with time. Early mobilisation regimens (active and passive)
achieve quicker recovery of motion than static immobilisation but the long-term outcome
appears similar. Given the comparable outcomes between dynamic splinting and EAM,
we therefore favour EAM which is simpler and more convenient.
Keywords
Extensor tendon - Immobilisation - Early active motion - Early passive motion - Dynamic
splinting - Rehabilitation