Altan L, Kanat E
Rheumatic Disease and Hydrotherapy Section, Atatürk Rehabilitation Center, Uludağ University Medical Faculty, Bursa, Turkey.
Clin Rheumatol. 2008 Aug;27(8):1015-9. doi: 10.1007/s10067-008-0862-8. Epub 2008 Mar 26.
We investigated the effectiveness of braces in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis and compared the effects of two different types of most frequently used braces. A total of 50 patients (seven males and 43 females) with an age range of 34 to 60 who had the diagnosis of lateral epicondylitis were included in the study. The patients were distributed into two groups. In group I, 25 patients (21 females and four males) were given a lateral epicondyle bandage. In group II, 25 patients (22 females and three males) were given a wrist resting splint holding the wrist in slight dorsiflexion. Evaluations of the patients were done before treatment and at the second and sixth weeks of treatment. Evaluation parameters were pain during rest and movement, sensitivity, algometer score, hand grip strength, and evaluation of the response to treatment. The response to treatment was evaluated according to the following categories: excellent, good, medium, and bad. In group I, only pain during rest and movement significantly decreased at 2 weeks while significant improvement was obtained for all parameters at 6 weeks. In group II, all parameters except for algometric sensitivity showed significant improvement at 2 weeks. Significant improvement was obtained for all parameters at 6 weeks in this group. Comparison of the two groups showed significantly better improvement in resting pain in group II at 2 weeks while there was no difference for other parameters including response to treatment at either evaluation stage. Braces might be a good strategy to help wait out the natural course of tennis elbow complaints. Although epicondyle bandage was not found to be superior to wrist splint in our study, we may suggest that it could be favored over splint since it is more practical and cosmetically acceptable.
我们研究了支具治疗外侧上髁炎的有效性，并比较了两种最常用支具的效果。本研究共纳入50例年龄在34至60岁之间、诊断为外侧上髁炎的患者（7例男性和43例女性）。患者被分为两组。在第一组中，25例患者（21例女性和4例男性）使用外侧上髁绷带。在第二组中，25例患者（22例女性和3例男性）使用将手腕保持在轻度背屈位的手腕休息夹板。在治疗前以及治疗的第二周和第六周对患者进行评估。评估参数包括休息和运动时的疼痛、敏感性、痛觉计评分、握力以及对治疗反应的评估。根据以下类别评估对治疗的反应：优秀、良好、中等和差。在第一组中，仅休息和运动时的疼痛在2周时显著降低，而在6周时所有参数均有显著改善。在第二组中，除痛觉计敏感性外，所有参数在2周时均有显著改善。该组在6周时所有参数均有显著改善。两组比较显示，第二组在2周时休息时疼痛的改善明显更好，而在包括两个评估阶段的治疗反应在内的其他参数方面没有差异。支具可能是帮助等待网球肘症状自然缓解过程的一种好策略。尽管在我们的研究中未发现上髁绷带优于手腕夹板，但我们可能会建议，由于它更实用且在外观上更易接受，因此可能比夹板更受青睐。
