肘关节外伤后早期康复干预的临床意义

目的探讨肘关节外伤后早期康复干预的临床意义。方法选择2000年7月～2008年3月创伤后5～21d行康复治疗的患者56例为早期康复组（A组），创伤21d后行康复治疗的患者63例为延迟康复组（B组）。于系统康复前后行Mayo肘关节评分及关节活动度（ROM）评定。疗效及关节功能结果评定分为优、良、可、差四级。结果康复前两组的肘关节Myao评分及ROM评定，差异没有统计学意义（P〉0．05）。康复治疗后，A组患者56例Mayo肘关节评分优36例，良17例，可2例，差1例，优良率（53／56）为94．64％；B组63例Mayo肘关节评分优23例，良27例，可9例，差4例，优良率（50／63）为79．36％，两组之间Mayo肘关节功能评分的优良率差异具有统计学意义（χ^2=69．21，P〈0．01）；A组肘关节ROM评测均优于B组（P〈0．05）。结论早期系统康复治疗有利于肘关节创伤后功能的恢复。

Role of early intervention of systematic rehabilitation in the patients with elbow joint dysfunction after trauma

Objective To explore retrospectively the role of early intervention of systematic rehabilitation in the patients with elbow joint dysfunction after trauma. Methods Fifty six patients with elbow joint dysfunction after trauma had been begun to treat by rehabilitation protocol in ranging from 5 d to 21d after trauma, and they had been divided into Group A; Sixty three patients had been begun to treat more than 21d after trauma, and they had been divided into Group B between July 2000 and March 2008. They had been evaluated with Mayo Elbow - Performance Score and range of motor（ROM） before and after systematic rehabilitation protocol. The outcomes of both the treatment and the function of the elbow joint involved were graded into the excellent, the good, the fair and the poor. Results The difference of the scores of Mayo Elbow - Performanee Score and the ROM had not statistical significance between the group A and the group B （ P 〉 0.05 ） before systematic rehabilitation protocol. After systematic rehabilitation protocol, the results grade were excellent in 36 cases, good in 17, mild in 2 and poor in 1 out of 56 cases in the group A, The rate of both excellent and good was 94.6429% ; excellent in 23 cases, good in 27, mild in 9 and poor in 4 out of 63 cases in the group B, The rate of both excellent and good was 79. 3651% according to Mayo Elbow-Performance Score and range of motor（ROM） criteria. The difference of the rate of both excellent and good had statistical significant between the group A and the group B（ χ^2 = 69. 2189, P 〈 0.01 ） basing on Mayo Elbow- Performance Score crteria; The difference of the ROM had statistical significant between the group A and the group B（ P 〈 0. 05 ） basing on range of motor（ROM） criteria. Conclusion MIPPO is a safe and effective technique in the treatment of distal tibial fracture or Pilon fractures.