Schultereckgelenkverletzung Typ III – eine Herausforderung auch für die Physiotherapie!

Type III acromioclavicular injuries: A challenge for physiotherapy! Introduction: The management of type III acromioclavicular joint dislocations, originally classified by Rockwood and Tossy, is still controversial. Purpose of this literature research was to evaluate the rehabilitation success of type III injury after conservative versus operative treatment concerning strength, function and pain of the shoulder. The objective of the study was to review the pros and cons of operative versus conservative treatment. Method: Relevant studies were collected by conducting a literature search using the online databases; the selection criteria were: randomized trials, clinical trials, review articles, and metaanalyses. A total of 10 papers published between 1998 and 2009 were selected and compromised 6 reviews and 4 clinically controlled studies. The analysis and comparison followed the criteria of evidence-based medicine. Results: The research showed no significant superiority of neither operative nor conservative treatment although the majority of the paper’s authors seem to recommend conservative intervention. Minimal differences in outcomes concerning strength, function and pain of the shoulder justify this decision. Several reasons such as the common risks of surgery, a bigger effort and explicitly higher costs only to name some seem to be unacceptable for the possible case of minimally better outcome. The analysis and interpretation of the given studies launched a discussion about the comparability of over 150 different surgical techniques, insufficiently defined approaches of conservative treatment, differences in gender concerning recuperation, validity of measuring equipment, long term and short term results of the particular methods. Discussion: At the current state of knowledge there is no gold standard for the treatment of type III acromioclavicular dislocations. To reach a consensus on which intervention should initially be chosen interventions have to respect the factors mentioned above while creating new clinically controlled studies. Furthermore, the lack of guidelines for a conservative approach constitutes a challenge for future findings regarding physical therapy.

[1]  E. Ceccarelli,et al.  Treatment of acute grade III acromioclavicular dislocation: a lack of evidence , 2008, Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[2]  H. Resch,et al.  Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: surgical versus conservative treatment. , 2008, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[3]  David J. Petron,et al.  Acromioclavicular joint disorders , 2007, Current sports medicine reports.

[4]  Simon P. T. Kemp,et al.  The Epidemiology of Shoulder Injuries in English Professional Rugby Union , 2007, The American journal of sports medicine.

[5]  Stephen W Marshall,et al.  Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate men's football injuries: National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance System, 1988-1989 through 2003-2004. , 2007, Journal of athletic training.

[6]  T. Jämsä,et al.  A novel treatment of grade III acromioclavicular joint dislocations with a C-hook implant , 2005, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[7]  Robert D Mehrberg,et al.  Disorders of the acromioclavicular joint. , 2004, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[8]  H. Langendorff AC-Verletzungen: konservativ-funktionelle Therapie und Ergebnisse , 2004, Trauma und Berufskrankheit.

[9]  J. Bradley,et al.  Decision making: operative versus nonoperative treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries. , 2003, Clinics in sports medicine.

[10]  T. Gerich,et al.  Akute AC-Gelenksprengung – operative oder konservative Therapie? , 2001, Der Unfallchirurg.

[11]  A. M. Phillips,et al.  Acromioclavicular Dislocation: Conservative or Surgical Therapy , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  G. Velde,et al.  Sports Injury Assessment and Rehabilitation , 1995 .

[13]  J. Tibone,et al.  Strength testing after third-degree acromioclavicular dislocations , 1992, The American journal of sports medicine.

[14]  R. Cofield Surgical Disorders of the Shoulder. , 1992 .

[15]  E. Wojtys,et al.  Conservative treatment of Grade III acromioclavicular dislocations. , 1991, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  G. Williams,et al.  Radiography of acromioclavicular dislocation and associated injuries. , 1991, Critical reviews in diagnostic imaging.

[17]  W. Wallace,et al.  The management of acute acromioclavicular dislocation. A randomised prospective controlled trial. , 1989, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[18]  F. Wilson,et al.  Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint. An end-result study. , 1987, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[19]  E. Larsen,et al.  Conservative or surgical treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation. A prospective, controlled, randomized study. , 1986, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  C. Rowe,et al.  The Bankart procedure: a long-term end-result study. , 1978, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[21]  G. Lob [Shoulder injuries]. , 1976, Fortschritte der Medizin.

[22]  R. Imatani,et al.  Acute, complete acromioclavicular separation. , 1975, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  M. Rosenørn,et al.  A comparison between conservative and operative treatment of acute acromioclavicular dislocation. , 1974, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.