Innovations in physical and rehabilitation medicine

peer reviewedAu cours de la dernière décennie, la Médecine Physique et Réadaptation (MPR) est une spécialité médicale qui a fortement évolué dans les différents domaines qui la concernent : de la prise en charge des lombalgies et lombosciatalgies ou encore de l’ostéoporose de manière pluridisciplinaire, en passant par l’utilisation des nouvelles technologies en rééducation neuro-locomotrice et de la robotisation en rééducation, chez les patients amputés par exemple, le développement de la médecine à vocation régénérative et la prévention en traumatologie du sport et, enfin, les progrès des techniques d’électrophysiologie pour le diagnostic des neuropathies à petites fibres. Ces différentes avancées seront abordées dans cet article.Over the last decade, Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) is a medical specialty that has evolved considerably in the various fields that concern it : from the management of low back pain and lumbosciatalgia or osteoporosis in a multidisciplinary manner, through the use of new technologies in neuro-locomotor rehabilitation and robotisation in amputee patients for example, the development of regenerative medicine and prevention in sports traumatology and, finally, the progress of electrophysiology techniques for the diagnosis of small-fibre neuropathies. These various advances will be discussed in this article

Haemophilic ankle arthropathy: case reports and review of the literature

peer reviewe

Haemophilic ankle arthropathy : case reports and review of the literature

peer reviewe

Factors influencing outcomes of rehabilitation for patients with lower limb loss

peer reviewe

Impact of microprocessor prosthetic knee on mobility and quality of life in patients with lower limb amputation: a systematic review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: Advanced technologies have made available the development of microprocessor prosthetic knee (MPK) to improve autonomy of patients with lower limb amputation. AIM: In the present systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the impact of the use of all types of MPK on patients' functional status and quality of life. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted this review according to the PRISMA Guidelines on Medline (via Ovid), Scopus and SportDiscuss. All identified articles were screened for their eligibility by two reviewers using Covidence software. The Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) or the NIH Quality Assessment Tool were used to assess the quality of the studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eighteen articles were included in the present review (7 randomized controlled trials - RCT), 6 cross-sectional and 5 follow-up studies). Number of participants included varied from 20 to 602, protocols' length varied from a single session to 12 weeks of use of MPK. Taken together, MPK users compared to NMPK users tend to present better functional status and mobility. Quality of life was also positively impacted in MPK users. On the other hand, the superiority of more advanced MPKs such as the Genium® is less clear, especially given the improvements over time of other MPKs such as the C-leg® and the Rheo knee®. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results, while it is clear that MPKs outperform NMPKs both for functional status and quality of life, additional benefits of one MPK over another is less clear. Future studies are needed to clarify these aspects