Rompe J D, Riedel C, Betz U, Fink C
Department of Orthopaedics, Johannes Gutenberg University School of Medicine, Mainz, Germany.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 May;82(5):578-82. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.22337.
To compare the effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) alone with a combination of ESWT and manual therapy of the cervical spine in treating chronic tennis elbow.
Prospective, matched single-blind control trial.
University hospital clinic.
Thirty patients with unilateral chronic tennis elbow, an unsuccessful conservative therapy during the 6 months before referral, and clinical signs of cervical dysfunction (eg, pressure pain at the C4-5 and/or C5-6 level, protraction of the head).
Three times at weekly intervals all patients received 1000 shockwave impulses of an energy flux density of.16mJ/mm(2) at the lateral elbow. Additionally, they underwent manual therapy of the cervical spine and the cervicothoracic junction 10 times (group I). For each patient, a control matched by age (3-yr range) and gender at first conservative treatment was drawn at random from 127 patients who had undergone low-energy shockwave therapy in the same unit in the past 3 years (group II). Follow-up examinations took place at 12 weeks and at 12 months.
The Roles and Maudsley outcome score at 12 months, defining an excellent or good result with no or only occasional discomfort without limitation of activity and range of motion.
Neither group differed statistically before the study, with a poor rating for all patients (p >.05). At 12 months, there was still no significant difference, with the outcome being excellent or good in 56% in group I, and in 60% in group II (p >.05). Each group showed significant improvement compared with the respective prestudy evaluation (p <.0001).
ESWT may be an effective conservative treatment method for unilateral chronic tennis elbow. The efficacy of additional cervical manual therapy for lateral epicondylitis remains questionable.
比较单纯体外冲击波疗法(ESWT)与ESWT联合颈椎手法治疗对慢性网球肘的疗效。
前瞻性、匹配单盲对照试验。
大学医院门诊。
30例单侧慢性网球肘患者,转诊前6个月保守治疗无效,且有颈椎功能障碍的临床体征(如C4-5和/或C5-6水平压痛、头部前伸)。
所有患者均在外侧肘部接受每周1次、共3次、能量通量密度为0.16mJ/mm²的1000次冲击波脉冲治疗。此外,第一组患者还接受10次颈椎和颈胸交界处的手法治疗。从过去3年在同一科室接受低能量冲击波治疗的127例患者中,为每位患者随机抽取1名年龄(相差3岁范围)和性别匹配的对照者(第二组)。在12周和12个月时进行随访检查。
12个月时的Roles和Maudsley疗效评分,定义为结果优或良,无或仅有偶尔不适,活动和运动范围无受限。
研究前两组无统计学差异,所有患者评分均较差(p>.05)。12个月时,仍无显著差异,第一组56%的患者结果为优或良,第二组为60%(p>.05)。与各自的研究前评估相比,每组均有显著改善(p<.0001)。
ESWT可能是治疗单侧慢性网球肘的一种有效的保守治疗方法。额外的颈椎手法治疗对肱骨外上髁炎的疗效仍存在疑问。