Chung Bryan, Wiley J Preston
University of Calgary Sport Medicine Centre, Faculty of Kinesiology, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Am J Sports Med. 2004 Oct-Nov;32(7):1660-7. doi: 10.1177/0363546503262806.
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy is a relatively new therapy used in the treatment of chronic tendon-related pain. Few randomized controlled trials have been performed on it, and no studies have examined the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy as a frontline therapy for tendon-related pain.
Subjects treated with active extracorporeal shock wave therapy will have higher rates of treatment success than subjects treated with sham extracorporeal shock wave therapy.
Double-blind randomized controlled trial.
Sixty subjects who had previously untreated lateral epicondylitis for less than 1 year and more than 3 weeks were included in this study. Subjects were randomly allocated to receive 1 session per week for 3 weeks of either sham or active extra-corporeal shock wave therapy. Subjects in the active therapy group received 2000 pulses (energy flux density, 0.03-0.17 mJ/mm(2)). All subjects were provided with a forearm-stretching program. After 8 weeks of therapy, subjects were classified as either treatment successes or treatment failures according to fulfillment of all 3 criteria: (1) at least a 50% reduction in the overall pain visual analog scale score, (2) a maximum allowable overall pain visual analog scale score of 4.0 cm, and (3) no use of pain medication for elbow pain for 2 weeks before the 8 week follow-up. Visual analog scale scores were also collected for pain at rest, during sleep, during activity, at its worst, and at its least, as well as for quality of life (using the EuroQoL questionnaire) and grip strength.
Success rates in the sham and active therapy groups were 31% and 39%, respectively. No significant difference was detected between groups (chi(2)(1)= 0.3880, P = .533). Mean change in quality of life over 8 weeks was an increase of 1.3 and 3.3 for sham and active therapy groups, respectively, and mean change in grip strength over 8 weeks was an increase of 7.4 kg and 6.8 kg for sham and active therapy groups, respectively.
Despite improvement in pain scores and pain-free maximum grip strength within groups, there does not appear to be a meaningful difference between treating lateral epicondylitis with extracorporeal shock wave therapy combined with forearm-stretching program and treating with forearm-stretching program alone, with respect to resolving pain within an 8-week period of commencing treatment.
体外冲击波疗法是一种用于治疗慢性肌腱相关疼痛的相对较新的疗法。针对该疗法进行的随机对照试验较少,且尚无研究考察体外冲击波疗法作为肌腱相关疼痛一线治疗方法的有效性。
接受主动体外冲击波疗法治疗的受试者的治疗成功率高于接受假体外冲击波疗法治疗的受试者。
双盲随机对照试验。
本研究纳入了60名患有外侧上髁炎且病程少于1年但超过3周且此前未接受过治疗的受试者。受试者被随机分配,每周接受1次治疗,为期3周,分别接受假体外冲击波疗法或主动体外冲击波疗法。主动治疗组的受试者接受2000次脉冲(能量通量密度为0.03 - 0.17 mJ/mm²)。所有受试者均接受一项前臂伸展训练计划。治疗8周后,根据以下所有3项标准是否达成,将受试者分类为治疗成功或治疗失败:(1)总体疼痛视觉模拟量表评分至少降低50%;(2)总体疼痛视觉模拟量表的最大允许评分为4.0 cm;(3)在8周随访前的2周内未使用治疗肘部疼痛的止痛药物。还收集了静息时、睡眠期间、活动期间、最严重时和最轻微时的疼痛视觉模拟量表评分,以及生活质量评分(使用欧洲生活质量调查问卷)和握力。
假治疗组和主动治疗组的成功率分别为31%和39%。两组之间未检测到显著差异(χ²(1)= 0.3880,P = 0.533)。假治疗组和主动治疗组在8周内生活质量的平均变化分别为提高1.3和3.3,握力在8周内的平均变化分别为增加7.4 kg和6.8 kg。
尽管两组内疼痛评分和无痛时最大握力均有所改善,但在开始治疗的8周内,就缓解疼痛而言,体外冲击波疗法联合前臂伸展训练计划治疗外侧上髁炎与单纯采用前臂伸展训练计划治疗之间似乎没有显著差异。