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 .
Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparison of 2 Rehabilitation Techniques
This study was conducted to compare postoperative  total knee arthroplasty rehabilitation protocol s. The hypothesis of this study was that patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty could achieve range of motion and hospital discharge in the same period using a postoperative rehabilitation protocol that did not use a continuous passive motion machine . This r and omized prospect i ve study compared 46 total knee arthroplasties in which a continuous passive motion machine was used with 37 total knees that were rehabilitated with  early passive flexion of the knee ( named drop and dangle protocol ) . Postoperative physical therapy regimens were otherwise the same for both groups . Surgical technique was the same for both groups except for closure which was performed in the drop and dangle group with the knee at 90 ° to 95 ° flexion . Only patients with osteoarthritis were included in the study , and in both groups of patients received the same prosthetic components . Patients in the drop and dangle group were discharged from the hospital 1 day earlier ( p = 0.01 ) and had a statistically better extension range of 2.8 ° at 6 months ( p = 0.03 ) . Knees in the drop and dangle group had less drainage ( p = 0.06 ) . Range of motion and hospital discharge can be achieved in a similar time interval with the drop and dangle technique as with using a continuous passive motion device , and that such a device is not required for postoperative knee rehabilitation
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 .