Kaplan Seyhmus, Sah Volkan, Ozkan Sezai, Adanas Cihan, Delen Veysel
Department of Sports Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Van Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkiye.
Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Van Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkiye.
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2023 May;33(5):554-559. doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2023.05.554.
To evaluate and compare the effects of radial and focused types of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on lateral epicondylitis.
A randomised sham-controlled trial. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Sports Medicine, Yuzuncu Yil University Hospital, Van, Turkiye, from August 2019 to April 2020.
Patients with acute lateral epicondylitis were randomised into focused, radial, and sham ESWT groups. The ESWT was applied for three sessions at 2-4 days intervals. All the subjects were evaluated at baseline (week 0), week 5, and 13. Patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) scores were used as outcome measures.
At weeks 5 and 13, all PRTEE scores (pain, function, and total) were remarkably improved in the focused and radial groups (p<0.001), but not in the sham group (p>0.05). Focused ESWT was superior to radial ESWT for the change of pain scores from baseline to week 5 (18.8±13.9 vs. 11.8±9.1; p=0.026) and week 13 (17.8±13.1 vs. 11.7±10.5, p=0.084). Focused ESWT was more effective than radial ESWT for the change of function scores from baseline to weak 5 (17.9±12.5 vs. 11.2±9.5; p=0.025) and week 13 (16.9±11.6 vs. 10.7±10.1; p=0.032). Focused ESWT was superior to radial ESWT for the change of total scores from baseline to week 5 (36.7±25.9 vs. 23.0±17.2; p=0.021) and week 13 (34.7±24.3 vs. 22.4±18.5; p=0.044).
Focused and radial ESWT are effective in lateral epicondylitis. The focused ESWT is superior to the radial ESWT. Thus, focused ESWT should be preferred in lateral epicondylitis.
Lateral epicondylitis, Shock wave, Randomised sham-controlled trial.
评估并比较放射状和聚焦式体外冲击波疗法（ESWT）对肱骨外上髁炎的疗效。
一项随机假对照试验。研究地点和时间：2019年8月至2020年4月，土耳其凡城尤祖恩居尔大学医院运动医学科。
急性肱骨外上髁炎患者被随机分为聚焦式、放射状和假ESWT组。ESWT治疗3次，间隔2 - 4天。所有受试者在基线（第0周）、第5周和第13周进行评估。采用患者自评网球肘评估（PRTEE）评分作为疗效指标。
在第5周和第13周时，聚焦式和放射状组的所有PRTEE评分（疼痛、功能和总分）均显著改善（p<0.001），而假治疗组无改善（p>0.05）。从基线到第5周（18.8±13.9对11.8±9.1；p = 0.026）和第13周（17.8±13.1对11.7±10.5，p = 0.084），聚焦式ESWT在疼痛评分变化方面优于放射状ESWT。从基线到第5周（17.9±12.5对11.2±9.5；p = 0.025）和第13周（16.9±11.6对10.7±10.1；p = 0.032），聚焦式ESWT在功能评分变化方面比放射状ESWT更有效。从基线到第5周（36.7±25.9对23.0±17.2；p = 0.021）和第13周（34.7±24.3对22.4±18.5；p = 0.044），聚焦式ESWT在总分变化方面优于放射状ESWT。
聚焦式和放射状ESWT对肱骨外上髁炎均有效。聚焦式ESWT优于放射状ESWT。因此，肱骨外上髁炎应首选聚焦式ESWT。
肱骨外上髁炎；冲击波；随机假对照试验
