Range of Motion/Common Diagnosis (PDF)
Who are candidates for a Dynasplint® System?
These changes are more susceptible to the benefits of low-load, prolonged-duration stretch in addition to short-lived techniques (including thermal agents, joint mobilization, manual therapy techniques, TENS and NMES).
All causes of limited range of motion favorably respond to stress or low doses of tension.
What diagnoses are common?
Where is it applied?
When should a Dynasplint System be prescribed?
The patient is at the ideal stage to apply a Dynasplint System:
A clinical study documented that routine use of the Dynasplint System will reduce cost and rehabilitation time by as much as 53 percent, while significantly improving patient outcome and functional use.
Why are patients with limited range of motion candidates for low-load, prolonged-duration stretch?
Permanent length increases in restricted structure also have been demonstrated by the work of Arem and Madden, who have proven the positive effects of prolonged gentle stretch on developing scar tissue. Light, et al, further demonstrated the effectiveness of low-load, prolonged-duration stress over high-load brief stress in a clinical study of human knee flexion contractures.
Low-load, prolonged-duration stretch is the only method that works within the physiological limits of dense connective tissue to synthesize new tissue to its permanent elongated state by remodeling and reorienting the collagen in dense connective tissue and causing the adaptive lengthening of muscle.
Dynasplint Systems provide the most biomechanically correct method to provide this type of stimulus.
For more information, send an email to our insurance department.
1. Hepburn GR, et al: Multi-Center Clinical Investigation on the Effect of Incorporating Dynasplint® Treatment into Standard Physical Therapy Practice for Restoring Range of Motion of Elbows and Knees, presented at the New York APTA State Chapter Meeting, New York, NY, April 26, 1985.
2. MacKay-Lyons M: Low-Load, prolonged-duration stretch in Treatment of Elbow Flexion Contractures Secondary to Head Trauma: A Case Report. Physical Therapy, Vol 69, No 4: 292-296, April 1989.
3. Botte MJ, et al: Spasticity and Contracture, Physiologic Aspects of Formation. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, No. 233: 7-18, August 1988.
4. Lebmkubl LD, et al: Multimodality Treatment of Joint Contractures in Patients with Severe Brain Injury: Cost, Effectiveness, and Integration of Therapies in the Application of Serial/Inhibitive Casts. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, pp 23-42, December 1990.