Journal Home
Search for

Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 37-43 (January 2009)


View previous. 10 of 27 View next.

Static Progressive versus Three-point Elbow Extension Splinting: A Mathematical Analysis

Shrikant J. Chinchalkar, BSc, OT, OTR, CHTCorresponding Author Informationemail address

Joshua Pearce, PhD

George S. Athwal, MD, FRCSC

published online 26 August 2008.

Abstract 

Elbow joint contractures are often treated by using static progressive, dynamic, turnbuckle, or serial static splinting. These splint designs are effective in regaining functional elbow range of motion due to the high forces applied to the contracted tissues; however, regaining terminal elbow extension remains a challenge. Static progressive splints are commonly used to initiate treatment, however, are considered less effective in regaining terminal extension. Recently, the concept of converting a static progressive splint into a three-point static progressive splint (TPSPS) to regain terminal extension has been introduced. This paper mathematically analyzes the compressive and rotational forces in static progressive and TPSPSs. Our hypothesis was that three-point static progressive splinting was superior to the standard static progressive elbow extension splint in applying rotational forces to the elbow at terminal extension.

Hand and Upper Limb Center, St. Joseph's Health Care, London, ON, Canada

Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Queen's University, Kingston, ON Canada

Hand and Upper Limb Center, St. Joseph's Health Care, London, ON, Canada

Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence and reprint requests to Shrikant J. Chinchalkar, BSc, OT, OTR, CHT, Hand Therapy Division, Hand and Upper Limb Center, St. Joseph's Health Care, 268 Grosvenor Street, London, ON N6A 4A6, Canada.

PII: S0894-1130(08)00104-X

doi:10.1197/j.jht.2008.06.008


View previous. 10 of 27 View next.