Abstracts by keywords: health services study - continuous passive motion – physical therapy - orthopedics – rehabilitation treatment
There are already numerous studies and reviews on the subject of CPM splint therapy in the literature. In addition to controlled and randomized clinical studies on the use of CPM for various indications [4-12], there are also isolated meta-analyses [13, 14] and reviews [15, 16]. Overall, the study situation turns out to be very heterogeneous with regard to the indication, the comparative therapy, the duration of the study, the start of treatment and the endpoint consideration. In addition to this heterogeneity in the study situation, the fact that the studies come from different countries whose care structure cannot easily be transferred to the German health system [9, 17] makes it even more difficult. Methodologically, the studies are limited, among other things, by the fact that complete blinding of everyone involved is not practical. The treatment results are also influenced by many factors (e.g. type of joint injury, surgical technique, comorbidities). One objective of the present study was to describe this heterogeneity, with a focus on the real care situation. A central component of this care situation is the decision of the health insurance companies as to whether the CPM splint treatment will actually be approved after the prescription has been issued. In the sense of “real-world evidence”, this not only corresponds to the actual reality of care, but also does justice to the variety of possible scenarios in which patients can find themselves after knee or shoulder surgery.