Efficacy of upper limb rehabilitation robot on elbow functional recovery after arthroscopic elbow joint release
10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20250123-00074
- VernacularTitle:上肢康复机器人对关节镜下肘关节松解术后肘部功能恢复的作用
- Author:
Ping FANG
1
;
Ye ZHANG
;
Shiyang YU
;
Yanmao WANG
;
Shengdi LU
;
Lihua HUANG
;
Yiming XU
;
Jian DING
Author Information
1. 上海交通大学医学院附属第六人民医院康复医学科，上海 200233
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Elbow joint;
Rehabilitation;
Surface electromyography;
Active and passive training
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
2025;45(13):872-878
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of an upper limb rehabilitation robot on the recovery of elbow function recovery following arthroscopic elbow joint release.Methods:Seventy-two patients who underwent arthroscopic elbow joint release at Shanghai Sixth People’s Hospital from December 2022 to December 2023 were recruited. All patients were randomly assigned to either the conventional group (n=36; 16 males, 20 females; age 34.39±9.04 years, range 24-56; fractures: 4 intercondylar humerus, 18 olecranon, 8 radial head, 6 other) which received conventional rehabilitation postoperatively, or the robot-assisted group (n=36; 18 males, 18 females; age 33.78±9.98 years, range 20-59; fractures distribution identical to the conventional group) receiving conventional rehabilitation combined with robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation therapy. The active range of motion (ROM) of elbow joint, Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), visual analogue scale (VAS) of elbow joint were recorded preoperatively and at 4 weeks and 3 months postoperatively. The surface electromyography were analyzed at 3 months postoperatively.Results:All patients completed the 3-month rehabilitation program. At 4 weeks postoperatively, the conventional group exhibited a mean active ROM of 106.78°±9.91°, MEPS of 67.78±7.68, VAS of 2.11±0.74; the robot-assisted group showed active ROM of 113.72°±7.06°, MEPS of 73.33±9.28, VAS of 21.89±0.46. By 3 months postoperatively, the conventional group achieved a mean active ROM of 118.11°±6.75°, MEPS of 85.00±8.66, VAS of 0.67±0.67; robot-assisted achieved a mean active ROM of 127.61°±6.61°, MEPS of 91.11±6.57, VAS of 0.39±0.49. Both groups exhibited significant improvements in active ROM and MEPS, and significant reductions in VAS scores at 4 weeks and 3 months postoperatively compared with preoperatively values ( P<0.05). The robot-assisted group demonstrated significantly higher active ROM and MEPS at both 4 weeks and 3 months postoperatively, and a significantly lower VAS score at 3 months postoperatively, compared with the conventional group ( P<0.05). Surface electromyography at 3 months revealed significantly higher biceps brachii root mean square and significantly lower co-contraction index in the robot-assisted group compared to the conventional group ( P<0.05). No adverse symptoms were reported in the treated elbows of either group during the operation and follow-up period. Conclusion:The integration of upper limb rehabilitation robot-assisted therapy and conventional rehabilitation program significantly enhances the recovery of elbow range of motion and functional outcomes at 3 months following arthroscopic elbow joint release.
