Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105, USA.
Pain Pract. 2013 Feb;13(2):96-103. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2012.00560.x. Epub 2012 May 4.
The suprascapular nerve block is frequently implemented to treat chronic shoulder pain. Although effective the nerve blockade provides only a short-term relief, and more compelling apaproaches have been investigated. Pulsed radiofrequency (pRF) has been anecdotally reported as safe and reliable method. However, formal efficacy study has not been published. Ostensibly evidence-based validation of a new method is necessary for both scholastic and practical purposes.
This study was designed as a randomized active placebo-control double-blind trial. Because of encountered difficulties in recruitment and high rate of dropout, the study was redesigned as to allow a smaller sample size and statistical analyses were performed utilizing the last observation carry forward method. Lidocaine injections alone or with combination of the pRF were performed. Participants were followed up during 6 months, and multiple subjective and objective outcome variables were recorded.
Thirteen of 22 participants completed 6 months follow-up. Dropout rate was higher in the lidocaine group. A significant linear trend (P < 0.05) for improvement on the numeric rating scale, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and Constant-Murley score was observed in the pRF group, but not in the lidocaine group. Patients in the pRF group were on average more satisfied than the lidocaine group at 1 month (P = 0.041) and at 3 months (P = 0.035).
Considering limitations of the study design and statistics, it seems plausible to attribute better results in the pRF group to unique properties of this physical modality.
肩胛上神经阻滞常用于治疗慢性肩部疼痛。尽管神经阻滞有效,但只能提供短期缓解,因此已经研究了更有效的方法。脉冲射频(pRF)已被报道为安全可靠的方法。然而,尚未发表正式的疗效研究。出于学术和实际目的,显然有必要对新方法进行基于证据的验证。
本研究设计为随机、活性安慰剂对照、双盲试验。由于招募困难和高辍学率,研究设计进行了重新设计,以允许较小的样本量,并利用最后观察结转方法进行统计分析。单独使用利多卡因注射或联合使用 pRF 进行治疗。在 6 个月的随访期间记录了参与者的多项主观和客观的结果变量。
22 名参与者中有 13 名完成了 6 个月的随访。利多卡因组的辍学率较高。pRF 组的数字评分量表、肩部疼痛和残疾指数以及 Constant-Murley 评分均呈显著线性趋势(P<0.05),而利多卡因组则无此趋势。pRF 组的患者在 1 个月(P=0.041)和 3 个月(P=0.035)时比利多卡因组更满意。
考虑到研究设计和统计学的局限性,pRF 组的结果更好,这似乎归因于这种物理模式的独特特性。