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 .
[A comparison of kinesitherapy with and without continuous passive motion (CPM) after the entire allograft surgery of the knee].
A prospect i ve r and omized single blind investigation after total knee arthroplasty was performed to evaluate two rehabilitation protocol s ( one with CPM and the other without CPM ) . A series of 87 consecutive total knee arthroplasties in 76 patients ( 72 women and 4 men ) was analyzed . The average age of the patients was 64.7 years .  Kinesitherapy with CPM was performed in 30 ( 34.5 % ) cases , where as in 57 ( 65.5 % ) cases kinesitherapy without CPM was performed . Early functional results according to the HSS scale were assessed on the 14th day after surgery . In the group treated with CPM there were 26.7 % excellent results , 70.0 % good results and 3.3 satisfactory results . The group treated without CPM there were 26.3 % excellent results , 70.2 % good results and 3.5 % satisfactory results . No statistically significant differences were noted between the results yielded by these two rehabilitation protocol
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 .