Introduction: In terms of access to treatment of acromioclavicular joint
injuries, there are many controversies, especially after the appearance of
works that promote "neglecting of injury". Goal: The aim of this paper is to
give a comparative analysis of the results of rehabilitation of patients
after acute injury of the acromioclavicular joint of the third degree,
treated by two surgical techniques: by Phemister and Vukov. Material and
methods: In this study, we investigated a total of 60 operated patients: 30
patients were operated by Phemister technique, and 30 by Vukov technique.
Results: Postoperative follow-up lasted for one year. Between these two
groups, the time when the rehabilitation process began is significantly
different p<0.01. With technique by Vukov, the rehabilitation begins on the
first postoperative day and with technique by Phemister it begins later
(after 7 weeks outpatient). With technique by Phemister, rehabilitation
lasted on average 60 days, and with technique by Vukov on average 40 days.
The duration of recovery is also significantly different p< 0.01, with
technique by Vukov the duration time is shorter, and therefore the process of
rehabilitation in days - is shorter than with the other technique. Both
techniques gave good stability of the lateral end of clavicle. The difference
was not statistically significant p> 0.05, which means that both techniques
can be applied depending on the indication and the experience of the surgeon.