Home | Blog | About | Glossary | Compliance | Careers | Colleagues | Español

Dynasplint Systems


Request More Information

Restoring people, business and life the way it ought to be.




Who are candidates for a Dynasplint® System?
Appropriate candidates include patients with connective tissue (e.g., tendons, ligaments, etc.) changes which have occurred as a result of traumatic and non-traumatic conditions or immobilization, causing limited joint range of motion.

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?
1. Total Knee Replacement
2. A.C.L. Reconstruction
3. Fractures
    a. Distal Radius/Ulna
    b. Radial Head
    c. Malleolar, Pylon
    d. Tibial Plateau
4. Adhesive Capsulitis
5. Bunionectomy, Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
6. Extensor Tendon Repairs
7. Limb Lengthening

Where is it applied?
1. Healthcare Professionals' Office
2. Therapy Clinic

When should a Dynasplint System be prescribed?
Optimal recovery occurs from the earliest possible application, ideally during the adaptive phase of wound healing or within 100 days from the date of injury or trauma.

The patient is at the ideal stage to apply a Dynasplint System:
1. Once passive range of motion is prescribed
2. Has predisposition in joint to limit ROM recovery; arthritis, articular fracture
3. 2-4 weeks S/P cast/fixator removal
4. No contraindications

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?
Despite the cause of a patient's limitation of motion, the work of Kottke has proven that these changes can be reversed by providing eight or more continuous hours of controlled dynamic tension on the connective tissue, creating a biomechanical creep or physiological remodeling of the tissue. Gradual opening of the tissue in this manner virtually eliminates the risk of fiber tearing and tissue weakening; the tissue is thus restored to its permanent normal elongated length.

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.


Return to Top