Bankart repair rehab isn’t one-size-fits-all. In this episode of the University Orthopedics PT Podcast, host Dan Bien and Drew Jenk, PT, DPT, explore how to individualize rehab from surgery through return to sport.

Key Takeaways

Surgical Details Drive Rehab (02:58)

• Surgical position
• Tear size
• Bone loss
• Tissue quality

Why Protocols Vary (05:30)

• Education + sling/ROM compliance are critical early
• Gradual ER progression based on end feel
• Careful flexion/overhead progression, especially in athletes

Managing Stiffness (17:27)

• Assess fascial restrictions
• Use multi-planar ROM
• Target overlooked soft tissue limitations

Surgical Variations (22:11 – 25:30)

• Remplissage: limits ER, adds posterior cuff demand (22:11)
• Bone loss: impacts stability and timelines (24:12)
• Revisions: require more conservative progression (25:30)

Mid-Stage Rehab (26:45)

• Individualize based on sport/goals
• Emphasize scapular control
• Use objective strength testing (LSI)
• Coordinate with S&C staff

Plyometrics & Progression (32:51)

• Start controlled → progress to reactive
• Train outside base of support

Return-to-Sport Considerations (34:39 – 36:42)

• Sport type (contact vs. non-contact) impacts timelines (34:39)
• Posterior Bankart: consider weight-bearing stress (36:42)

Psychological + Neurocognitive Factors (37:50 – 41:01)

• Early screening for fear/readiness (37:50)
• Add neurocognitive training + perturbations (41:01)

Return-to-Sport Testing (43:51)

• CKCUEST
• ASH Test
• UE Y-Balance

Gaps in Research (45:31)

• Lack of standardization
• Need for better RTS and neurocognitive data

The Bottom Line

Bankart rehab should be criteria-based, not protocol-driven—guided by surgical details, objective testing, and the athlete’s demands.