Purpose: The postoperative use of a rehabilitative knee brace after isolated primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) using a hamstring tendon (HT) autograft is controversial. A knee brace may provide subjective safety but can cause damage if applied incorrectly. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of a knee brace on clinical outcomes following isolated ACLR using HT autograft. Methods: In this prospective randomised trial, 114 adults (32.4 ± 11.5 years, 35.1% women) underwent isolated ACLR using HT autograft after primary ACL rupture. Patients were randomly assigned to wear either a knee brace (n = 58) or no brace (n = 56) for 6 weeks postoperatively. An initial examination was performed preoperatively, and at 6 weeks and 4, 6, and 12 months. The primary endpoint was the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score to measure participants’ subjective perceptions. Secondary endpoints included objective knee function assessed by IKDC, instrumented knee laxity measurements, isokinetic strength tests of the knee extensors and flexors, Lysholm Knee Score, Tegner Activity Score, Anterior Cruciate Ligament—Return to Sport after Injury Score, and quality of life determined by Short Form-36 (SF36). Results: There were no statistically significant or clinically meaningful differences in IKDC scores between the two study groups (3.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) −1.39 to 7.97, p = 0.03 for evidence of non-inferiority of brace-free compared with brace-based rehabilitation). The difference in Lysholm score was 3.20 (95% CI −2.47 to 8.87); the difference in SF36 physical component score 0.09 (95% CI −1.93 to 3.03). In addition, isokinetic testing did not reveal any clinically relevant differences between the groups (n.s.). Conclusions: Brace-free rehabilitation is non-inferior to a brace-based protocol regarding physical recovery 1 year after isolated ACLR using HT autograft. Consequently, the use of a knee brace might be avoided after such a procedure. Level of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study.

(1) Background: Approximately 73 countries worldwide implemented a daylight saving time (DST) policy: setting their clocks forward in spring and back in fall. The main purpose of this practice is to save electricity. The aim of the present study was to find out how DST affects the incidence and impact of seriously injured patients. (2) Methods: In a retrospective, multi-center study, we used the data recorded in the TraumaRegister DGU^® (TR-DGU) between 2003 and 2017 from Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. We compared the included cases 1 week before and after DST. (3) Results: After DST from standard time to summertime, we found an increased incidence of accidents of motorcyclists up to 51.58%. The result is consistent with other studies. (4) Conclusion: However, our results should be interpreted as a tendency. Other influencing factors, such as time of day and weather conditions, were not considered.

Background: Gamification is a promising approach to support rehabilitation, but implementing new devices after hand surgery (HS) faces challenges, especially in patient motivation and compliance. Technology-based, personalized solutions may encourage patients to perform gamified exercises consistently. This study investigated the impact of a tablet-based gamified hand-mobilization system on functional outcomes after HS compared to standard finger-expander training. Methods: Forty inpatients at BG Klinikum Duisburg were randomly assigned to a gamified or control group. Both groups underwent four weeks of stationary rehabilitation. Outcomes were assessed using the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), SF-36 health-related quality of life, and a visual analog scale (VAS) at pre- (T0) and post-training (T1). Tablet use frequency and duration were recorded. Results: DASH scores improved significantly over time (F(1.55, 58.85) = 16.36, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.137) with no Group or Time × Group effects (p > 0.40), exceeding the MCID in both groups. SF-36 MCS, PCS, and VAS pain also improved over time (all p < 0.05) with no between-group differences (p > 0.40). Exercise duration differed (p = 0.007), but training frequency did not. Conclusions: Both gamified and conventional rehabilitation programs led to clinically meaningful improvements in hand function after hand surgery. No significant differences were observed between groups, indicating that the tablet-based system was feasible and well-accepted but not superior to standard training.

Purpose: Postoperative pain remains a major obstacle to early mobilisation following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and is particularly challenging in patients with posttraumatic arthritis due to prior injury, scarring, and complex surgeries. While various analgesic strategies have been evaluated in degenerative TKA, evidence in posttraumatic cases is lacking. This study is the first to compare patient‐controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA), continuous femoral/sciatic nerve block (cFNB/cSNB), and continuous local infiltration analgesia (cLIA) in this specific population. Methods: In this prospective, monocentric, randomised controlled trial, 92 patients undergoing TKA for posttraumatic arthritis were allocated to PCIA ( n = 31), cFNB/cSNB ( n = 30) or cLIA ( n = 31). Postoperative pain was assessed using the numeric rating scale (NRS) from day 1 (t1) to discharge (t6). Secondary outcomes included range of motion (ROM), rescue analgesic use, Knee Society Score (KSS) and patient satisfaction. Statistical comparisons between groups were performed using adjusted pairwise tests. Results: At t1, patients in cFNB/cSNB reported significantly lower pain scores compared to cLIA ( p = 0.039). cLIA required significantly more rescue analgesics at t1/t2 (both p < 0.05). Active/passive knee flexion was consistently higher in cFNB/cSNB from t1 to t6 (all p < 0.05). No differences were observed in postoperative mobility, KSS or satisfaction. All groups showed significant improvement in pain and ROM over time. Conclusions: In patients undergoing TKA for posttraumatic arthritis, cFNB/cSNB provided superior early postoperative pain control and functional recovery compared to PCIA and cLIA. The findings suggest that standard fast‐track protocols may not be fully applicable in this complex patient population, highlighting the need for individualised analgesic strategies. Level of Evidence: Level I.