ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07907614TRICEPSUpdated Oct 30, 2026

Comparison of GMI, PNF, and Standard Care for Post-Traumatic Elbow Stiffness Rehabilitation in Adults

An interventional study of Standard Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation and Graded Motor Imagery (GMI) in Elbow Stiffess and Rehabilitation Treatment, sponsored by Centre Hospitalier de Valenciennes. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in France. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 64 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-30.

Sponsored by Centre Hospitalier de Valenciennes · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Updated Oct 30, 2026Newly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
75
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 64 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

TRICEPS is a single-center, randomized, open-label, three-arm study evaluating two rehabilitation approaches for post-traumatic elbow stiffness in adults: Graded Motor Imagery (GMI) and Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF), each combined with standard care, compared with standard care alone.

A total of 75 adults aged 18 to 64 years with post-traumatic elbow stiffness following a fracture will be randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to one of three groups: standard rehabilitation alone, standard rehabilitation combined with GMI, or standard rehabilitation combined with PNF. The treatment period will last 6 weeks.

The primary objective is to compare the effects of these rehabilitation approaches on upper-limb functional capacity, assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes include muscle strength, active joint range of motion, pain, kinesiophobia, and health-related quality of life.

Read the detailed description

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is a frequent complication following elbow injury and may lead to substantial limitations in upper-limb function and activities of daily living. Conventional rehabilitation includes joint mobilization, stretching, strengthening, and functional exercises. Graded Motor Imagery (GMI) and Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) are rehabilitation approaches that may help improve movement and functional recovery. TRICEPS aims to compare these two approaches, when added to standard rehabilitation, with standard rehabilitation alone.

This is a prospective, single-center, randomized, open-label, controlled study with three parallel groups. A total of 75 adults aged 18 to 64 years with post-traumatic elbow stiffness following a fracture will be randomized equally to one of the following groups:

  1. **Standard care group:** standard rehabilitation, including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, a psychological assessment at the beginning of treatment, and a home or supervised independent exercise program.
  2. **GMI group:** standard rehabilitation combined with Graded Motor Imagery. The GMI program consists of three successive phases over 6 weeks: laterality recognition, imagined movements, and mirror-based visual feedback.
  3. **PNF group:** standard rehabilitation combined with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation using the Hold-Relax technique, delivered by a physiotherapist.

The treatment period lasts 6 weeks. After this period, participants continue rehabilitation according to usual clinical practice in the department.

The primary objective is to compare the effectiveness of GMI and PNF, each combined with standard care, with standard care alone in improving upper-limb functional capacity. The primary outcome is the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, measured at baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment.

Secondary objectives are to compare the three groups with regard to muscle strength, active elbow and forearm range of motion, pain during rehabilitation, kinesiophobia, and health-related quality of life. Assessments are performed at baseline and after 6 weeks of treatment; additional follow-up assessments are performed 3 months after the end of treatment for the outcomes specified in the protocol.

The planned sample size is 75 participants, with 25 participants allocated to each group.

02

Conditions studied

  • Elbow Stiffess
  • Rehabilitation Treatment

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Post-traumatic elbow stiffness
  • Elbow fracture
  • Rehabilitation
  • Graded Motor Imagery
  • Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation
  • DASH
03

In context

Elbow Fractures

47 studies on the registry are indexed under Elbow Fractures; 13 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 75 is above the median of 60 across 29 interventional studies indexed under Elbow Fractures.

Browse Elbow Fractures studies →

Lead sponsor

Centre Hospitalier de Valenciennes is the lead sponsor of 15 studies on the registry; 9 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 64 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults aged 18 to 64 years
  • Post-traumatic elbow stiffness following an elbow fracture treated surgically or non-surgically
  • Enrollment 6 to 8 weeks after the initial management of the elbow trauma
  • Elbow stiffness defined by at least one of the following limitations : flexion less than 130°, extension deficit greater than 30° (extension range less than - 30° as specified in the protocol), supination less than 50°, or pronation less than 50°
  • Limitation of elbow flexion and/or extension in the sagittal plane
  • Written, free, informed, and explicit consent to participate in the study
  • Beneficiary of the French social security system or eligible as a dependent, excluding beneficiaries covered by State Medical Aid (AME)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Infection of the surgical wound
  • Unhealed fracture
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Peripheral nerve injury
  • Lesion requiring further surgery, such as an osteoma or ankylosis
  • Cognitive impairment preventing the patient from understanding the information provided about the study
  • Limited joint mobility or absence of the contralateral upper limb
  • Psychiatric, visual, rheumatological, or neurological condition that could compromise the rehabilitation treatment
  • Under legal guardianship, curatorship, or judicial protection
  • Detained or deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision
  • Beneficiary of State Medical Aid (Aide Médicale de l'Etat, AME)
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
75 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Standard Care Alone

    Participants receive standard multidisciplinary rehabilitation for 6 weeks, including physiotherapy 5 times per week, occupational therapy 5 times per week, and a psychological assessment at the beginning of treatment. Participants also perform a prescribed independent exercise program for 20 to 30 minutes per day, 7 days per week. The rehabilitation program includes 30 minutes of physiotherapy with passive stretching, 30 minutes of occupational therapy focused on upper-limb function, and 30 minutes of independent exercises.

    Other: Standard Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation

  • Experimental
    Standard Care Plus Graded Motor Imagery (GMI)

    Participants receive standard multidisciplinary rehabilitation for 6 weeks, with Graded Motor Imagery (GMI) integrated into the rehabilitation program. The GMI intervention consists of three successive 2-week phases: left-right discrimination, imagined movements, and mirror-based visual feedback. The program includes 30 minutes of physiotherapy with passive stretching, 30 minutes of occupational therapy incorporating GMI, and 30 minutes of independent exercises. The total rehabilitation time is kept equivalent across the three study groups.

    Other: Standard Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation · Behavioral: Graded Motor Imagery (GMI)

  • Experimental
    Standard Care Plus Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF)

    Participants receive standard multidisciplinary rehabilitation for 6 weeks, with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) using the Hold-Relax technique integrated into physiotherapy. PNF sessions are delivered by a physiotherapist 5 times per week and replace passive stretching within the 30-minute physiotherapy session. Participants also receive 30 minutes of occupational therapy focused on upper-limb function and perform 30 minutes of independent exercises. The total rehabilitation time is kept equivalent across the three study groups.

    Other: Standard Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation · Other: Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) - Hold-Relax

Interventions

  • OtherStandard Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation

    Standard multidisciplinary rehabilitation over 6 weeks, consisting of physiotherapy 5 times per week, occupational therapy 5 times per week, a psychological assessment at the beginning of treatment, and a prescribed independent exercise program. Physiotherapy includes passive stretching, and occupational therapy focuses on upper-limb function. The total rehabilitation time is standardized across the three study groups.

  • BehavioralGraded Motor Imagery (GMI)

    Graded Motor Imagery (GMI) integrated into the rehabilitation program over 6 weeks, consisting of three successive 2-week phases: left-right discrimination, imagined movements, and mirror-based visual feedback. The intervention is incorporated into occupational therapy and replaces an equivalent amount of standard rehabilitation time as needed, without increasing the total rehabilitation time.

  • OtherProprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) - Hold-Relax

    Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) using the Hold-Relax technique, delivered by a trained physiotherapist 5 times per week over 6 weeks. The technique is integrated into the 30-minute physiotherapy session and replaces passive stretching. The total rehabilitation time remains equivalent to that of the standard care group.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Upper-limb functional capacity assessed by the DASH score at 6 weeks

    Upper-limb functional capacity will be assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. The DASH score at 6 weeks will be compared between the three study groups, with adjustment for the baseline DASH score.

    Time frame: 6 weeks after treatment initiation

Secondary outcomes

  1. Upper-limb functional capacity assessed by the DASH score at 3 months after treatment

    Upper-limb functional capacity will be assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire to evaluate the maintenance of treatment effects and compare the three study groups.

    Time frame: 3 months after the end of treatment (18 weeks after inclusion)

  2. Isometric elbow flexor and extensor muscle strength at 6 weeks

    Isometric strength of the elbow flexor and extensor muscles will be measured and compared between the three study groups.

    Time frame: 6 weeks after treatment initiation

  3. Isometric elbow flexor ans extensor muscle strength at 3-month follow-up

    Isometric strength of the elbow flexor and extensor muscles will be measured to assess the maintenance of treatment effects and compared between the three study groups.

    Time frame: 3 months after the end of treatment (18 weeks after inclusion)

  4. Active elbow and forearm range of motion at 6 weeks

    Active elbow flexion and extension and forearm pronation and supination will be measured to assess changes in joint range of motion.

    Time frame: 6 weeks after treatment initiation

  5. Active elbow and forearm range of motion at 3-month follow-up

    Active elbow flexion and extension and forearm pronation and supination will be measured to assess the maintenance of treatment effects.

    Time frame: 3 months after the end of treatment (18 weeks after inclusion)

  6. Pain intensity before and after rehabilitation sessions

    Pain intensity will be assessed using a 0-10 numeric rating scale immediately before and after each rehabilitation session. The difference between pre-session and post-session pain scores will be assessed.

    Time frame: Before and immediately after each rehabilitation session during the 6-week treatment period

  7. Pain intensity at 6 weeks

    Pain intensity will be assessed using a 0-10 numeric rating scale to compare pain at the end of the treatment period between the three study groups.

    Time frame: 6 weeks after treatment initiation

  8. Pain intensity at 3-month follow-up

    Pain intensity will be assessed using a 0-10 numeric rating scale to evaluate the maintenance of treatment effects.

    Time frame: 3 months after the end of treatment (18 weeks after inclusion)

  9. Kinesiophobia assessed by the short TAMPA scale at 6 weeks

    Kinesiophobia will be assessed using the short version of the Tampa Scale to compare the effects of the three rehabilitation protocols after treatment.

    Time frame: 6 weeks after treatment initiation

  10. Kinesiophobia assessed by the short TAMPA scale at 3-month follow-up

    Kinesiophobia will be assessed using the short version of the Tampa Scale to evaluate the maintenance of treatment effects.

    Time frame: 3 months after the end of treatment (18 weeks after inclusion)

  11. Health-related quality of life assessed by the EQ-5D-5L at 6 weeks

    Health-related quality of life will be assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, including the health profile, EQ-5D index score, and EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS).

    Time frame: 6 weeks after treatment initiation

  12. Health-related quality of life assessed by the EQ-5D-5L at 3-month follow-up

    Health-related quality of life will be assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, including the health profile, EQ-5D index score, and EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), to evaluate the maintenance of treatment effects.

    Time frame: 3 months after the end of treatment (18 weeks after inclusion)

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Piacenza A, Zerilli A, Viccari I, Castelli G. Effectiveness of conservative treatment in the management of post-traumatic elbow stiffness: A systematic review. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2024 Nov;74:103194. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2024.103194. Epub 2024 Sep 26. PubMed 39342760 ↗
  • Birinci T, Kaya Mutlu E, Altun S. The efficacy of graded motor imagery in post-traumatic stiffness of elbow: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022 Oct;31(10):2147-2156. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.05.031. Epub 2022 Jul 5. PubMed 35803550 ↗
  • Polli A, Moseley GL, Gioia E, Beames T, Baba A, Agostini M, Tonin P, Turolla A. Graded motor imagery for patients with stroke: a non-randomized controlled trial of a new approach. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2017 Feb;53(1):14-23. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.16.04215-5. Epub 2016 Jul 21. PubMed 27442717 ↗
  • Birinci T, Razak Ozdincler A, Altun S, Kural C. A structured exercise programme combined with proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching or static stretching in posttraumatic stiffness of the elbow: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2019 Feb;33(2):241-252. doi: 10.1177/0269215518802886. Epub 2018 Oct 10. PubMed 30304958 ↗
  • Hindle KB, Whitcomb TJ, Briggs WO, Hong J. Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF): Its Mechanisms and Effects on Range of Motion and Muscular Function. J Hum Kinet. 2012 Mar;31:105-13. doi: 10.2478/v10078-012-0011-y. Epub 2012 Apr 3. PubMed 23487249 ↗
  • Davila SA, Johnston-Jones K. Managing the stiff elbow: operative, nonoperative, and postoperative techniques. J Hand Ther. 2006 Apr-Jun;19(2):268-81. doi: 10.1197/j.jht.2006.02.017. PubMed 16713873 ↗
  • Morrey BF, Askew LJ, Chao EY. A biomechanical study of normal functional elbow motion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981 Jul;63(6):872-7. PubMed 7240327 ↗
  • Siemensma MF, van der Windt AE, van Es EM, Colaris JW, Eygendaal D. Management of the stiff elbow: a literature review. EFORT Open Rev. 2023 May 9;8(5):351-360. doi: 10.1530/EOR-23-0039. PubMed 37158372 ↗
  • Schneider MM, Rentschler V, Geyer S, Jung C, Hollinger B, Pfalzer F, Beitzel K, Burkhart K, Schoch C. Rehabilitation after surgical release of the stiff elbow: A literature review. J Orthop. 2024 Nov 10;64:51-58. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.10.061. eCollection 2025 Jun. PubMed 39691650 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Dec 2026; primary completion for Nov 2030, 47 months later.

Of 15 interventional studies with no phase under Elbow Fractures, half reached primary completion within 22 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 36. This study's planned 47 months is above that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 26, 2026
First posted
Oct 30, 2026
StartEst.
Dec 2026
Primary completionEst.
Nov 2030
CompletionEst.
Feb 2031
Last update
Oct 30, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Registered
First appeared on the registry. No changes since
Oct 30, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 30, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07907614
Lead sponsor
Centre Hospitalier de Valenciennes
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 30, 2026
Start date
Dec 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Nov 2030 (estimated)
Completion
Feb 2031 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 30, 2026

Study contacts

Benjamin Dervaux, PhD
Contact
dervaux-b@ch-valenciennes.fr
03.27.14.33.29 ext. +33
Benjamin Dervaux, PhD
principal investigator · CH de Valenciennes

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion