Aydın Abdulkadir, Atiç Ramazan
Prosthetics and Orthotics Department, Dicle University Medical School, Diyarbakir, Turkey,
Orthopedics and Traumatology Department, Dicle University Medical School, Diyarbakır, Turkey.
J Pain Res. 2018 Aug 2;11:1459-1467. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S166679. eCollection 2018.
Extracorporeal shock-wave therapy (ESWT) and wrist-extensor splints (WESs) are two commonly used methods in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. In this study, the efficacy of these two methods was compared.
The study was planned as a prospective randomized controlled study. A total of 67 patients were enrolled. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 received ESWT (32 patients) and group 2 received WES (35 patients). Patients in group 1 underwent four sessions of ESWT once every week. In each session, an ESWT device at 10-12 Hz, 2,000 pulses, and 1.6-1.8 bar pressure was used. Patients in group 2 used a wrist splint, holding the wrist at 30°-45° extension for 4 weeks. Patients were assessed for handgrip strength, pain at rest, pain while working, and quality of life. Data were collected before and after treatment (at weeks 4, 12, and 24). A visual analog scale was used to evaluate pain at rest and while working, a hand dynamometer for handgrip strength, subscales of the SF36 Health Survey to evaluate quality of life, and the Turkish version of the patient-rated tennis-elbow evaluation was used to evaluate functioning of the affected arm during various daily life activities.
In both ESWT and WES groups, although there were considerably significant improvements (<0.001) in the parameters evaluated (pain at rest and while working, handgrip strength, Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation, Nirschl score, and SF36 subscales) were observed at 4, 12, and 24 weeks compared to pretreatment values, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of our evaluation parameters at the three time points (>0.05).
Both ESWT and WES applications were found to yield significantly superior results when compared to pretreatment values. In comparison of the two groups, on the other hand, there was no statistically significant difference.
体外冲击波疗法（ESWT）和伸腕夹板（WES）是治疗肱骨外上髁炎的两种常用方法。本研究对这两种方法的疗效进行了比较。
本研究设计为前瞻性随机对照研究。共纳入67例患者。患者分为两组：第1组接受ESWT治疗（32例患者），第2组接受WES治疗（35例患者）。第1组患者每周接受一次，共四期ESWT治疗。每期使用频率为10 - 12Hz、2000次脉冲、压力为1.6 - 1.8巴的ESWT设备。第2组患者使用腕部夹板，将手腕保持在伸展30° - 45°的位置，持续4周。对患者的握力、静息痛、工作时疼痛和生活质量进行评估。在治疗前及治疗后（第4、12和24周）收集数据。使用视觉模拟量表评估静息痛和工作时疼痛，使用握力计测量握力，使用SF36健康调查的子量表评估生活质量，并使用土耳其语版的患者自评网球肘评估量表评估患侧手臂在各种日常生活活动中的功能。
在ESWT组和WES组中，与治疗前值相比，在第4、12和24周时，所评估的参数（静息痛和工作时疼痛、握力、患者自评网球肘评估、Nirschl评分和SF36子量表）均有显著改善（<0.001），但在这三个时间点的评估参数方面，两组之间无统计学显著差异（>0.05）。
与治疗前值相比，ESWT和WES应用均产生了显著更好的结果。另一方面，两组之间比较无统计学显著差异。
