Evaluation of comparative results of rehabilitation of patients with acromioclavicular dislocation of the third degree treated by surgical techniques by Phemister and Vukov

• Published in: Acta chirurgica Iugoslavica Vol. 59; no. 1; pp. 81 - 85
• Main Authors: Radovanović, Tatjana, Vukov, Vladimir, Bumbasirević, Marko, Manojlović-Opacić, Mirjana, Grajić, Mirko, Djurasić, Ljubomir
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Serbia 2012
• Subjects: Acromioclavicular Joint - injuries; Acromioclavicular Joint - surgery; Adolescent; Adult; Humans; Joint Dislocations - rehabilitation; Joint Dislocations - surgery; Middle Aged; Orthopedic Procedures - methods; Orthopedic Procedures - rehabilitation; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0354-950X; 2406-0887
• DOI: 10.2298/ACI1201081R

In terms of access to treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries, there are many controversies, especially after the appearance of works that promote "neglecting of injury". The aim of this paper is to give a comparative analysis of the results of rehabilitation of patients after acute injury of the acromioclavicular joint of the third degree, treated by two surgical techniques: by Phemister and Vukov. In this study, we investigated a total of 60 operated patients: 30 patients were operated by Phemister techniq-ue, and 30 by Vukov technique. Postoperative follow-up lasted for one year. Between these two groups, the time when the rehabilitation process began is significantly different p < 0.01. With technique by Vukov, the rehabilitation begins on the first postoperative day and with technique by Phemister it begins later (after 7 weeks outpatient). With technique by Phemister, rehabilitation lasted on average 60 days, and with technique by Vukov on average 40 days. The duration of recovery is also significantly different p < 0.01, with technique by Vukov the duration time is shorter, and therefore the process of rehabilitation in days--is shorter than with the other technique. Both techniques gave good stability of the lateral end of clavicle. The difference was not statistically significant p > 0.05, which means that both techniques can be applied depending on the indication and the experience of the surgeon.