Suppr超能文献

阿格尼卡尔玛疗法与超声疗法治疗网球肘疗效比较——一项随机对照初步研究。

Comparing the efficacy of Agnikarma with therapeutic ultrasound in the management of tennis elbow - A randomised controlled preliminary study.

作者信息

Sreelekshmi R, Raj Shaithya, Rajeshwari P N, Tripathy Rabinarayan

机构信息

Department of Shalya Tantra (Surgery), Amrita School of Ayurveda, Amritapuri, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Vallikavu, Clappana P O, Kollam District, 690525, Kerala, India.

Department of Shalya Tantra (Surgery), Amrita School of Ayurveda, Amritapuri, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Vallikavu, Clappana P O, Kollam District, 690525, Kerala, India.

出版信息

J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2024 May-Jun;15(3):100898. doi: 10.1016/j.jaim.2024.100898. Epub 2024 May 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Tennis elbow is a common musculoskeletal disease of elbow and causes restricted movement of forearm. Various treatment modalities like NSAID, corticosteroid injection, counter bracing, physiotherapy, surgery etc are available but safety and efficacy of one treatment over another is under research. Ayurveda classifies this condition as Snayugata vata. According to Sushruta, Agnikarma (thermal cautery) is the one among the treatment modalities for Snayugata vata. Previously published randomised controlled trials have shown that therapeutic ultrasound is safe and effective for tennis elbow. However, the comparative efficacy of these two treatment modalities is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study compares the effects of Agnikarma (AGK) with Therapeutic Ultrasound (TUS) in reducing pain, tenderness and restores the ability to do various tasks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 30 patients were enrolled in the study as an open-label, double-armed, prospectively designed comparative clinical study, with 15 patients in each group. Group AGK received two sittings of Agnikarma and Group TUS received therapeutic ultrasound. To analyze the patients, three outcome measures were adopted: pain intensity, assessed with a Numerical Pain Rating Scale, tenderness - Grade 0 to Grade 4 (mentioned in Hutchinson's clinical methods) and pain and functional Disability assessed with the Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire. Assessment was done on 0, 8, 15, 30 and 60 day.

RESULT

Tennis elbow can be effectively treated with AGK and TUS. (p < 0.001 for pain, tenderness and PRTEE). While comparing between the groups, on 8 day and 15 day statistically significant difference in pain and PRTEE (p < 0.05) was noted between AGK and TUS groups. Agnikarma showed better results than therapeutic ultrasound in pain management and showed an improved quality of life from 8 day onwards and for a period up to 2 months.

CONCLUSION

Both Agnikarma and therapeutic ultrasound have roles in the management of tennis elbow. However, starting on the 8 day and continuing for up to 2 months, Agnikarma showed a significant benefit in pain management and improved status for quality of life.

摘要

背景

网球肘是一种常见的肘部肌肉骨骼疾病,会导致前臂活动受限。有多种治疗方式可供选择,如非甾体抗炎药、皮质类固醇注射、反支撑、物理治疗、手术等,但不同治疗方式的安全性和有效性仍在研究中。阿育吠陀医学将这种病症归类为Snayugata vata。根据苏阇罗的说法,火灼疗法(热烧灼)是治疗Snayugata vata的治疗方式之一。此前发表的随机对照试验表明,治疗性超声对网球肘安全有效。然而,这两种治疗方式的比较疗效尚不清楚。

目的

本研究比较火灼疗法(AGK)与治疗性超声(TUS)在减轻疼痛、压痛以及恢复进行各种任务能力方面的效果。

材料与方法

本研究共纳入30例患者,为开放标签、双臂、前瞻性设计的比较临床研究,每组15例患者。AGK组接受两次火灼疗法治疗,TUS组接受治疗性超声治疗。为分析患者情况,采用了三项结局指标:疼痛强度,用数字疼痛评分量表评估;压痛——0级至4级(哈钦森临床方法中提及);疼痛和功能障碍用患者自评网球肘评估(PRTEE)问卷评估。在第0、8、15、30和60天进行评估。

结果

网球肘可通过AGK和TUS有效治疗。(疼痛、压痛和PRTEE的p < 0.001)。在组间比较时,在第8天和第15天,AGK组和TUS组在疼痛和PRTEE方面存在统计学显著差异(p < 0.05)。火灼疗法在疼痛管理方面比治疗性超声显示出更好的效果,并且从第8天起直至2个月期间生活质量有所改善。

结论

火灼疗法和治疗性超声在网球肘的治疗中都有作用。然而,从第8天开始直至2个月,火灼疗法在疼痛管理方面显示出显著益处,并改善了生活质量状况。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/221f/11108973/99c64f06188b/gr1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验