The effects of training, immobilization and remobilization on musculoskeletal tissue
Authors: Kannus P. , Jozsa L. , Renström P. , Järvinen M. , Kvist M. , Lehto M. , Oja P. , Vuort I. 
Published: July 2010

Compared with the knowledge on immobilization, the effects of remobilization on musculoskeletal tissues have not been well established. What is sure is that remobilization and rehabilitation of any component of the musculoskeletal tissues require much more time than the time needed to cause the immobilization atrophy. With intensive rehabilitation, the functional properties of skeletal muscles can be improved significantly even years after the injury and following immobilization, but no study has shown whether full recovery is possible and whether these rehabilitated muscles are able to respond normally to further training. Experimental studies have given evidence that slow‐twitch muscle fibres have better capacity for recovery than fast‐twitch fibres, most likely due to better circulation and higher protein turnover. Also evidence has been given that fibre regeneration is possible through satellite cell activation and myotube formation. Very little is known, however, about the effects of age, gender or the level of preimmobilization muscle performance on the restoration capacity. Also the fate of the marked structural changes (for example, connective tissue accumulation) induced by immobilization is unknown. Tendon and ligament tissues are likely to respond appropriately to remobilization, resulting in acceleration of collagen synthesis and fibril neoformation. However, there is a strong suspicion that remobilized tendons and ligaments will not achieve all the biochemical and biomechanical properties of their healthy counterparts. Specifically, the amount of weak type III collagen has been shown to be overrepresented in these tissues instead of mature, strong type I collagen. It is not known whether this is an important risk factor for ruptures during later activity. The effects of remobilization on muscle‐tendon junction and proprioceptive organs are not known. It would not be surprising if the serious structural changes induced by immobilization were unrestorable. In the literature dealing with immobilization and remobilization, cartilage degeneration is always a major concern, because not only too strenuous training or immobilization, but also unskilful remobilization may activate this process leading finally to osteoarthrosis. Bone may be one of the best components of musculoskeletal tissues to respond to remobilization, probably because the immobilization atrophy of bone is largely quantitative (osteoporosis) only. The prerequisites for bony recovery are that the follow‐up time is long enough (months) and that immobilization has not exceeded about 6 months, the time limit between active and inactive (irreversible) osteoporosis. Prevention of the atrophying effects of immobilization can be very successful if performed properly. According to present knowledge, there are many methods for the purpose, including preimmobilization training early, controlled mobilization; optimal positioning of the immobilized joint; muscular training during immobilization; early weightbearing; exercise with the nonimmobilized extremity; and electrical stimulation. Lots of education and information will be needed, however, before these methods are deeply rooted in the daily routines of the attending physicians, physical therapists, athletic trainers and other persons involved in the treatment of musculoskeletal problems.