The use of passive stretching of the elbow after arthrolysis is controversial. We report the results of open arthrolysis in 81 patients. Prospectively collected outcome data with a minimum follow-up of one year were analysed. All patients had sustained an intra-articular fracture initially and all procedures were performed by the same surgeon under continuous brachial plexus block anaesthesia and with continuous passive movement (CPM) used post-operatively for two to three days. CPM was used to maintain the movement achieved during surgery and passive stretching was not used at any time. A senior physiotherapist assessed all the patients at regular intervals. The mean range of movement (ROM) improved from 69° to 109° and the function and pain of the upper limb improved from 32 to 16 and from 20 to 10, as assessed by the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand score and a visual analogue scale, respectively. The greatest improvement was obtained in the stiffest elbows: nine patients with a pre-operative ROM < 30° achieved a mean post-operative ROM of 92° (55° to 125°). This study demonstrates that in patients with a stiff elbow after injury, good results may be obtained after open elbow arthrolysis without using passive stretching during rehabilitation.

Arthrolysis and dynamic splinting have been used in the treatment of elbow contractures, but there is no standardised protocol for treatment of severe contractures with an arc of flexion < 30°. We present our results of radical arthrolysis with twin incisions with the use of a monolateral hinged fixator to treat very severe extra-articular contracture of the elbow. This retrospective study included 26 patients (15 males and 11 females) with a mean age of 30 years (12 to 60). The mean duration of stiffness was 9.1 months (5.4 to 18) with mean follow-up of 5.2 years (3.5 to 9.4). The mean pre-operative arc of movement was 15.6° (0° to 30°), with mean pre-operative flexion of 64.1° (30° to 120°) and mean pre-operative extension of 52.1° (10° to 90°). Post-operatively the mean arc improved to 102.4° (60° to 135°), the mean flexion improved to 119.1° (90° to 140°) and mean extension improved to 16.8° (0° to 30°) (p < 0.001). The Mayo elbow score improved from a mean of 45 (30 to 65) to 89 (75 to 100) points, and 13 had excellent, nine had good, three had fair and one had a poor result. We had one case of severe instability and one wound dehiscence which responded well to treatment. One case had deep infection with poor results which responded well to treatment. Our findings indicate that this method is very effective in the treatment of severe elbow contracture; however, a randomised controlled study is necessary for further evaluation