Download PDF
Handchirurgie Scan 2014; 03(02): 157-178
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1377278
Fortbildung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Handtherapeutische Versorgung verletzter Beugesehnen

Susanne Breier
,
Martin Behrendt
,
Natascha Weihs
,
Karl-Josef Prommersberger
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
16 June 2014 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Einführung stabilerer Nahttechniken, allen voran der 4-Strang-Naht, hat das postoperative Behandlungsregime nach Beugesehnenverletzung entscheidend verändert, erlaubt doch eine 4-Strang-Naht nicht nur eine aktive Streckung, sondern auch eine aktive Beugung des verletzten Fingers. Somit steht uns heute ein breites Spektrum unterschiedlicher Nachbehandlungskonzepte – von der vollständigen Ruhigstellung (Kleinkinder, nichtkooperationsfähige Patienten) bis hin zur Frühmobilisation mit aktiver Streckung und Beugung – zur Verfügung.

Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es, Prinzipien und Methoden der Nachbehandlung von Beugesehnenverletzungen näher zu beschreiben und derzeit eingesetzte Behandlungsschemata exemplarisch darzustellen.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Allen BN, Frykmann KG, Unsell RS et al. Ruptured flexor tendon tenorrhaphies in Zone II: repair and rehabilitation. J Hand Surg 1987; 12A: 18-21
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Amadio P. Friction of the gliding surface. Implications for tendon surgery and rehabilitation. J Hand Ther 2005; 18: 112-119
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Breier S. Verletzungen der Beugesehnen. In: Waldner-Nilsson B, (Hrsg). Handrehabilitation: Für Ergo- und Physiotherapeuten. Band 2: Verletzungen. 2. Aufl. Berlin: Springer; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Buck-Gramcko D, Dietrich FE, Gogge S. Bewertungskriterien bei Nachuntersuchungen von Beugesehnenwiederherstellungen. Handchirurgie 1976; 8: 65-69
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Buck-Gramcko D. Verletzungen der Beugesehnen. In: Nigst N, Buck-Gramcko D, Millesi H, (Hrsg). Handchirurgie. Band II. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1983
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Bunnell S. Repair of tendons in the fingers and discription of two new instruments. Surg Gynecol Ostet 1918; 26: 103
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Cannon N, Gettle K. Early AROM program for four strand flexor tendon repairs. ASHT Annual Meeting Panel. Hand Rehabilitation Center of Indiana PC; 09/1994
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Carlsson IK, Rosén B, Dahlin LB. Self-reported cold sensitivity in normal subjects and in patients with traumatic hand injuries or hand-arm vibration syndrome. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2010; 11: 89
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Chow JA, Thomas LJ, Dovelle S et al. Controlled motion rehabilitation after flexor tendon repair and grafting. J Bone Joint Surg 1988; 70: 591-595
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walters MR et al. Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg 1998; 23A: 575-587
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Cifaldi Collins D, Schwarze L. Early progressive resistance following immobilization of flexor tendon repairs. J Hand Ther 1991; 4: 111
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cooney WP et al. Improved tendon excursion following flexor tendon repair. J Hand Ther 1989; 2: 102-113
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Diday-Nolle AP, Breier S. Klinische Erfassung. In: Waldner-Nilsson B, (Hrsg). Handrehabilitation: Für Ergo- und Physiotherapeuten. Band 1: Grundlage, Erkrankungen. 3. Aufl. Berlin: Springer; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Dovelle S, Heeter P. The Washington Regimen: Rehabilitation of the hand following flexor tendon injuries. Phys Ther 1989; 69: 1034
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Duran RJ, Houser RG, Stover MG. Controlled passive motion following flexor tendon repair in zone II and III. American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons: Symposium on flexor tendon surgery in the hand. St. Louis: Mosby; 1975
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Evans RB, Thompson DE. The application of force to the healing tendon. J Hand Ther 1993; 6: 266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Evans RB, Thompson DE. Immediate active short arc motion following tendon repair. In: Hunter J, Schneider L, Macklin EJ, (eds). Tendon and Nerve Surgery in the Hand: A Third Decade. St. Louis: Mosby; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Evans RB. Managing the injured tendon: current concepts. J Hand Ther 2012; 25: 173-190
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gelberman RH, Woo SL, Lothringer K et al. Effects of early intermittent passive mobilization on healing canine flexor tendons. J Hand Surg 1982; 7A: 170
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Gelberman RH, Manske P. Factors influencing flexor tendon adhesions. Hand Clin 1985; 1: 35-42
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Germann G, Harth A, Wind G et al. Standardisierung und Validierung der deutschen Version 2.0 des „Disability of Arm, Shoulder, Hand“ (DASH)-Fragebogens zur Outcome-Messung an der oberen Extremität. Unfallchirurg 2003; 106: 13-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Gratton P. Early active mobilization after flexor tendon repairs. J Hand Ther 1993; 6: 285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Groth GN. Pyramid of progressive force exercises to the injured flexor tendon. J Hand Ther 2004; 17: 31-42
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Halikis MN, Manske PR, Kubota H et al. Effect of immobilization, immediate mobilization, and delayed mobilization on the resistance to digital flexion using a tendon injury model. J Hand Surg 1997; 22A: 464-472
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Harth A, Germann G, Jester A. Evaluating the effectiveness of a patient-oriented hand rehabilitation programme. J Hand Surg Eur 2008; 33: 771-778
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Horibe S, Woo SL, Spiegelman JJ et al. Excursion of the flexor digitorum profundus tendon: a kinematic study of the human and canine digits. J Orthopaed Res 1990; 8: 167
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand). Am J Ind Med 1996; 29: 602-608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Klein L. Early active motion flexor tendon protocol using one splint. J Hand Ther 2003; 16: 199-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kleinert HE et al. Primary repair of flexor tendons in “no manʼs land”. J Bone Surg 1967; 49A: 577
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Kleinert HE, Kutz JE, Cohen MJ. Primary repair of zone 2 flexor tendon lacerations. AAOS Symposium on Tendon Surgery in the Hand. St. Louis: Mosby; 1975
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Knobloch K, Kühn M, Papst S et al. Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) Konsensusversion Deutsch. Plastische, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Med. Hochschule Hannover; 1998
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Kubota H, Manske PR, Aoki M et al. Effect of motion and tension on injured flexor tendons in chickens. J Hand Surg 1996; 21A: 456
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Langer M, Surke C, Wieskötter B. Prinzipien der Sehnenbehandlung: Beugesehnen. In: Towfigh H, Hierner R, Langer M, et al. (Hrsg). Handchirurgie Band 1. Berlin: Springer; 2011
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Langer M. Die Rehabilitation nach Beugesehnenverletzungen der Hand. Orthopädische und Unfallchirurgische Praxis [in press]
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Lieber RL, Silva MJ, Amiel D et al. Wrist and digital joint motion produce unique flexor tendon force and excursion in the canine forelimb. J Biomech 1999; 32: 175-181
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 36 May EJ, Silverskiöld KL, Sollerman CJ. Controlled mobilization after flexor tendon repair in zone II: a prospective comparison of three methods. J Hand Surg 1992; 17A: 942-952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Peltz TS, Haddad R, Scougall PJ et al. Influence of locking stitch size in a four-strand cross-locked cruciate flexor tendon repair. J Hand Surg Am 2011; 36A: 450-455
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Pettengill KM. The Evolution of early mobilization of the repaired flexor tendon. J Hand Ther 2005; 18: 157-168
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Rosén B, Lundborg G. A model instrument for the documentation of outcome after nerve repair. J Hand Surg 2000; 25A: 535-543
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Sandow MJ, McMahon M. Active mobilisation following single cross grasp four-strand flexor tenorrhaphy (Adelaide repair). J Hand Surg Eur 2011; 36: 467-475
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Savage R. The influence of wrist position on the minimum force required for active movement of the interphalangeal joints. J Hand Surg 1988; 13B: 262-268
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Silfverskiöld KL, May EJ, Tornvall AH. Flexor digitorum profundus excursions during controlled motion after flexor tendon repair in zone II: a prospective clinical study. J Hand Surg 1992; 17: 122-131
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Silfverskiöld KL, May EJ. Flexor tendon repair in zone II with a new suture technique and an early mobilization program combining passive and active flexion. J Hand Surg 1994; 19A: 53
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Slattery P, McGrouther D. A modified Kleinert controlled mobilization splint following flexor tendon repair. J Hand Surg 1984; 9B: 34
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Starr HM, Snoddy M, Kyle E et al. Flexor tendon repair rehabilitation protocols: a systematic review. J Hand Surg 2013; 38A: 1712-1717
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Strickland JW, Glogovac SV. Digital function following flexor tendon repair in zone 2: a comparison study of immobilization and controlled passive motion. J Hand Surg 1980; 5A: 537
    Google Scholar
  • 47 Strickland JW, Cannon N. Flexor tendon repair – Indiana Method. Indiana Hand Center Newslett 1993; 1: 1
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Strickland JW. The scientific basis for advances in flexor tendon surgery. J Hand Ther 2005; 18: 94-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Tang JB. Indications, methods, postoperative motion and outcome evaluation of primary flexor tendon repairs in Zone 2. J Hand Surg Eur 2007; 32: 118
    Google Scholar
  • 50 Tang JB, Amadio PC, Boyer MI et al. Current practice of primary flexor tendon repair: a global view. Hand Clin 2013; 29: 179-189
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Tang JB. Outcomes and Evaluation of flexor tendon repair. Hand Clin 2013; 29: 251-259
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Trumble TE, Vedder NB, Seiler JG et al. Zone-II flexor tendon repair: a randomized prospective trial of active place-and-hold therapy compared with passive motion therapy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92: 1381-1389
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Urbaniak JR, Cahill JD, Mortenson RA. Tendon suturing methods: analysis of tensile strenghts. In: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons: Symposium on tendon surgery in the hand. St. Louis: Mosby; 1975
    Google Scholar
  • 54 Verdan CE. Practical considerations for primary and secondary repair in flexor tendon injuries. Surg Clin North Am 1964; 44: 951-970
    Google Scholar
  • 55 von der Heyde RL. Rehabilitation following tendon injury/surgery. In: Neligan PC, Chang J, (eds). Plastic Surgery. Vol. 6: Hand and upper extremity. 3rd. ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 56 Wehbé MA, Hunter JM. Flexor tendon gliding in the hand. I: In vivo excursions. J Hand Surg 1985; 10A: 570-574
    Google Scholar
  • 57 Wehbé MA, Hunter JM. Flexor tendon gliding in the hand. II: Differential gliding. J Hand Surg 1985; 10A: 575-579
    Google Scholar
  • 58 Wendt H. Belastungstraining. In: Scheepers C, Steding-Albrecht U, Jehn P, (Hrsg). Ergotherapie: Vom Behandeln zum Handeln. Lehrbuch für die theoretische und praktische Ausbildung. 3. Aufl. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2007: 302-303
    Google Scholar
  • 59 WHO. ICDH-e International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Final draft. Geneva: WHO; 2001
    Google Scholar