The estimates for risk of manipulation and adverse events are very imprecise and the estimate for the risk of adverse events does not distinguish between a clinical ly important increase and decrease in risk .
There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of CPM on participants ' global assessment of treatment effectiveness .
CPM does not have clinical ly important effects on active knee flexion ROM , pain , function or quality of life to justify its routine use .
BACKGROUND Arthritis of the knee is a common problem causing pain and disability .
If severe , knee arthritis can be surgically managed with a total knee arthroplasty .
Rehabilitation following knee arthroplasty often includes continuous passive motion ( CPM ) .
CPM is applied by a machine that passively and repeatedly moves the knee through a specified range of motion ( ROM ) .
It is believed that CPM increases recovery of knee ROM and has other therapeutic benefits .
However , it is not clear whether CPM is effective .
OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of CPM and st and ard postoperative care versus similar postoperative care , with or without additional knee exercises , in people with knee arthroplasty .
This review is an up date of a 2003 and 2010 version of the same review .
Home continuous passive motion machine versus professional physical therapy following total knee replacement.
A vigorous rehabilitation program following discharge from the hospital is necessary for patients having a total knee arthroplasty to maintain and improve range of motion and function . To compare the effectiveness of the continuous passive motion ( CPM ) machine as a home therapy program versus professional physical therapy , a prospect i ve , comparative , r and omized clinical study of 103 consecutive primary total knee arthroplasties in 80 patients ( 23 bilateral ) was performed . The CPM group consisted of 37 patients ( 49 knees ) , and the physical therapy group consisted of 43 patients ( 54 knees ) . At 2 weeks , knee flexion was similar in the two groups , but a flexion contracture was noted in the CPM group ( 4.2 degrees ) . This difference is felt by the authors to be clinical ly insignificant . At 6 months , there were no differences in knee scores , knee flexion , presence of flexion contracture , or extensor lag between the two groups . The cost for the CPM machine group was $ 10,582 ( $ 286 per patient ) , and the cost for professional therapy was $ 23,994 ( $ 558 per patient ) . We conclude that the CPM machine after the hospital discharge of patients having total knee replacement is an adequate rehabilitation alternative with lower cost and with no difference in results compared with professional therapy
The estimates for risk of manipulation and adverse events are very imprecise and the estimate for the risk of adverse events does not distinguish between a clinical ly important increase and decrease in risk .
There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of CPM on participants ' global assessment of treatment effectiveness .
CPM does not have clinical ly important effects on active knee flexion ROM , pain , function or quality of life to justify its routine use .
BACKGROUND Arthritis of the knee is a common problem causing pain and disability .
If severe , knee arthritis can be surgically managed with a total knee arthroplasty .
Rehabilitation following knee arthroplasty often includes continuous passive motion ( CPM ) .
CPM is applied by a machine that passively and repeatedly moves the knee through a specified range of motion ( ROM ) .
It is believed that CPM increases recovery of knee ROM and has other therapeutic benefits .
However , it is not clear whether CPM is effective .
OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of CPM and st and ard postoperative care versus similar postoperative care , with or without additional knee exercises , in people with knee arthroplasty .
This review is an up date of a 2003 and 2010 version of the same review .