Resting injured limbs delays recovery: A systematic review

Charlotte E. Nash, Sharon M. Mickan, Chris B. Del Mar, Paul P. Glasziou

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

51 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives Rest is commonly used as primary treatment, rather than just palliation, for injured limbs. We searched the literature for evidence of benefit or harm from immobilization or mobilization of acute limb injury in adults.

Data Sources We systematically searched for and retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mobilization or rest for treatment of acute limb injuries, in Medline (1966-2002), EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library, in all languages.

Review Methods We examined patient-centered outcomes (pain, swelling, and cost), functional outcomes (range of motion, days lost from work) and complications of treatment.

Results Forty-nine trials of immobilization for soft. tissue injuries and fractures of both upper and lower limbs were identified (3366 patients). All studies reported either no difference between rest and early mobilization protocols, or found in favor of early mobilization. Reported benefits of mobilization included earlier return to work; decreased pain, swelling, and stiffness; and a greater preserved range of joint motion. Early mobilization caused no increased complications, deformity or residual symptoms.

Conclusions We should not assume any benefit for immobilization after acute upper or lower limb injuries in adults. Rest appears to be overused as a treatment. More trials are needed to identify optimal programs for early mobilization.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)706-712
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Family Practice
Volume53
Issue number9
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2004

Fingerprint

Early Ambulation
Extremities
Immobilization
Wounds and Injuries
Articular Range of Motion
Lower Extremity
Library Science
Pain
Return to Work
Information Storage and Retrieval
Therapeutics
Language
Randomized Controlled Trials
Costs and Cost Analysis

Cite this

Nash, Charlotte E. ; Mickan, Sharon M. ; Del Mar, Chris B. ; Glasziou, Paul P. / Resting injured limbs delays recovery : A systematic review. In: Journal of Family Practice. 2004 ; Vol. 53, No. 9. pp. 706-712.
@article{fa5233ba6be54bf38cddc2d533a8ae49,
title = "Resting injured limbs delays recovery: A systematic review",
abstract = "Objectives Rest is commonly used as primary treatment, rather than just palliation, for injured limbs. We searched the literature for evidence of benefit or harm from immobilization or mobilization of acute limb injury in adults.Data Sources We systematically searched for and retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mobilization or rest for treatment of acute limb injuries, in Medline (1966-2002), EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library, in all languages.Review Methods We examined patient-centered outcomes (pain, swelling, and cost), functional outcomes (range of motion, days lost from work) and complications of treatment.Results Forty-nine trials of immobilization for soft. tissue injuries and fractures of both upper and lower limbs were identified (3366 patients). All studies reported either no difference between rest and early mobilization protocols, or found in favor of early mobilization. Reported benefits of mobilization included earlier return to work; decreased pain, swelling, and stiffness; and a greater preserved range of joint motion. Early mobilization caused no increased complications, deformity or residual symptoms.Conclusions We should not assume any benefit for immobilization after acute upper or lower limb injuries in adults. Rest appears to be overused as a treatment. More trials are needed to identify optimal programs for early mobilization.",
author = "Nash, {Charlotte E.} and Mickan, {Sharon M.} and {Del Mar}, {Chris B.} and Glasziou, {Paul P.}",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
language = "English",
volume = "53",
pages = "706--712",
journal = "Journal of Family Practice",
issn = "0094-3509",
publisher = "DOWDEN PUBLISHING CORP",
number = "9",

}

Resting injured limbs delays recovery : A systematic review. / Nash, Charlotte E.; Mickan, Sharon M.; Del Mar, Chris B.; Glasziou, Paul P.

In: Journal of Family Practice, Vol. 53, No. 9, 09.2004, p. 706-712.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resting injured limbs delays recovery

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Nash, Charlotte E.

AU - Mickan, Sharon M.

AU - Del Mar, Chris B.

AU - Glasziou, Paul P.

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - Objectives Rest is commonly used as primary treatment, rather than just palliation, for injured limbs. We searched the literature for evidence of benefit or harm from immobilization or mobilization of acute limb injury in adults.Data Sources We systematically searched for and retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mobilization or rest for treatment of acute limb injuries, in Medline (1966-2002), EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library, in all languages.Review Methods We examined patient-centered outcomes (pain, swelling, and cost), functional outcomes (range of motion, days lost from work) and complications of treatment.Results Forty-nine trials of immobilization for soft. tissue injuries and fractures of both upper and lower limbs were identified (3366 patients). All studies reported either no difference between rest and early mobilization protocols, or found in favor of early mobilization. Reported benefits of mobilization included earlier return to work; decreased pain, swelling, and stiffness; and a greater preserved range of joint motion. Early mobilization caused no increased complications, deformity or residual symptoms.Conclusions We should not assume any benefit for immobilization after acute upper or lower limb injuries in adults. Rest appears to be overused as a treatment. More trials are needed to identify optimal programs for early mobilization.

AB - Objectives Rest is commonly used as primary treatment, rather than just palliation, for injured limbs. We searched the literature for evidence of benefit or harm from immobilization or mobilization of acute limb injury in adults.Data Sources We systematically searched for and retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mobilization or rest for treatment of acute limb injuries, in Medline (1966-2002), EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library, in all languages.Review Methods We examined patient-centered outcomes (pain, swelling, and cost), functional outcomes (range of motion, days lost from work) and complications of treatment.Results Forty-nine trials of immobilization for soft. tissue injuries and fractures of both upper and lower limbs were identified (3366 patients). All studies reported either no difference between rest and early mobilization protocols, or found in favor of early mobilization. Reported benefits of mobilization included earlier return to work; decreased pain, swelling, and stiffness; and a greater preserved range of joint motion. Early mobilization caused no increased complications, deformity or residual symptoms.Conclusions We should not assume any benefit for immobilization after acute upper or lower limb injuries in adults. Rest appears to be overused as a treatment. More trials are needed to identify optimal programs for early mobilization.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4544364052&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

VL - 53

SP - 706

EP - 712

JO - Journal of Family Practice

JF - Journal of Family Practice

SN - 0094-3509

IS - 9

ER -