Skip to content

Protected Versus Early Weight Bearing Post Microfracture Surgery

Randomised Control Trial Comparing Conservative Rehabilitation and Protected Weight Bearing Versus Accelerated Rehabilitation and Early Weight Bearing Post Microfracture Knee Surgery.

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02542566
Enrollment
6
Registered
2015-09-07
Start date
2015-01-21
Completion date
2016-07-01
Last updated
2017-04-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Defect of Articular Cartilage

Brief summary

To test using a randomised control trial, whether conservative rehabilitation and protected weight bearing versus early weight bearing and accelerated rehabilitation affects patient outcomes post microfracture surgery of the knee.

Detailed description

To test using a randomised control trial, whether conservative rehabilitation and protected weight bearing versus early weight bearing and accelerated rehabilitation affects patient outcomes post microfracture surgery of the knee. Current practice in most units is to protect patients from weight bearing prior to entering a conservative physiotherapy rehabilitation program following microfracture surgery of the knee. At our unit we believe that protecting patients from weight bearing post microfracture surgery makes no difference to their outcome and only leads to a longer rehabilitation time and a delayed return to work and sports. Therefore we want to randomise patients who require microfracture surgery of the knee for cartilage defects into 2 post operative rehabilitation groups. One group will be able to weight bear early and will undergo an accelerated rehabilitation program whilst the other will be protected from weight bearing and will undergo a more conservative rehabilitation program. We will then follow patients up over a year and compare outcome data collected at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year post operatively to see if there was any difference in outcomes between the 2 groups. As secondary outcomes we will also compare the patients in the two groups to see if there is a difference in time taken to return to work and sporting activities

Interventions

Physiotherapy rehabilitation

Sponsors

Robert Jones and Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic and District NHS Trust
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
16 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Aged 16-60 years. Mechanically stable knee joint at outpatient examination. MRI confirmed grade 3 or 4 non-kissing cartilage defect within the knee. Able to fully understand the process and study and give informed consent to participate. Able to comply with the physiotherapy rehabilitation and follow up process.

Exclusion criteria

* Kissing cartilage defects. Defects deemed too large to undergo microfracture on MRI scan. Clinically unstable knee joint. Patients unable to consent to participation. Under 16 years of age or over 60 years of age. Patients likely to drop out of physiotherapy rehabilitation and study follow up.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Modified Tegner/Lysholm score from questionnaires.12 months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Time to return to work.12 months
Time to return to sporting activities12 months

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026