Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Effektivitats-vergleich der aktiven 'Camoped-aktivbewegungsschiene' mit der passiven 'CPM-motorschiene' nach implantation einer kniegelenk-endoprothese -- eine randomisierte, kontrollierte klinische studie (Effectiveness of the active 'Camoped-active motion machine' with the continuous passive motion machine (CPM) following prosthetic knee implantation: a comparison) [German]
Scheidhauer H, Geistert A, Buhrlen B, Hildebrand S
Krankengymnastik Zeitschrift fuer Physiotherapeuten 2003 May;55(5):774,776-778,780-787
clinical trial
5/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

This study is an attempt to verify the claim by the producer of the 'Camoped' active motion machine that it has an advantage over the conventional motorised systems. 96 patients who had had prosthetic knee joint implantation and who fulfilled other criteria, were included in this study. The relevant parameters were: pain, swelling, strength, mobility, and coping with activities of daily living. The findings were based on patient interviews and examinations by a physiotherapist, at various points in time. We concluded that, according to our methods of measurement, there were no significant differences between the two groups studied, neither in the early stages (after two weeks), nor in the later post-operative phases (after three and then 6 months) of the treatment program. These results represent the intermediate stages of our studies.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help