ACE Report Cover
Clinical, but no ultrasonographic, improvement of lateral epicondylitis with 3 treatments
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
SHOULDER & ELBOW
Clinical, but no ultrasonographic, improvement of lateral epicondylitis with 3 treatments .

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2013;1(1):30 Clin Rheumatol. 2012 May;31(5):807-12. doi: 10.1007/s10067-012-1939-y. Epub 2012 Jan 27
Autori che hanno contribuito

R Gunduz FU Malas P Borman S Kocaoglu L Ozcakar

59 patients diagnosed with the condition lateral epicondylitis (LE), were randomised into three groups to undergo either physical therapy, a single corticosteroid injection, or extracorporeal shock wave treatment (ESWT), to determine which technique was the most effective in treating LE. Following assessments measured over 6 months, results displayed that all three methods used for LE treatment had positive outcomes regarding reduction in pain and an increase in grip strength in early stages. However, there were no differences in thickness and cortical abnormalities of the common extensor tendon and bony cortex of the lateral epicondyle, measured using the ultrasonography, prior to and 6 months after treatment.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Not Reported
Conflitti:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

6/10

Criteri di segnalazione

16/20

Indice di fragilità

N/A

Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?

Was allocation adequately concealed?

Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?

Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?

Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?

Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?

Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

2/4

Randomization

3/4

Outcome Measurements

4/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

3/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

The most common condition associated with elbow pain is lateral epicondylitis (LE). LE results from the overuse of an injured extensor tendon of the dominant upper extremity. The condition is commonly treated through deep tendon friction massage, mobilization, physiotherapy exercises, stretching and strengthening exercises, splints, and local corticosteroid injections. Recently, shockwave therapy and Cyriax therapy have also been suggested to alleviate pain caused by LE. However, in the few comparisons that have been made between treatment types, the results have been conflicting. Hence, this study aimed to determine which of the treatment methods is more efficient in treating LE, through the clinical and ultrasonographic comparison of therapeutic effects.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

Were there any significant differences in outcomes between physical therapy, corticosteroid injection, and ESWT in patients with LE when compared clinically versus ultrasonographically, when measured over a 6 month period?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
Population:
59 patients with lateral epicondylitis (LE)
Intervention:
Group I: Patients received 10 sessions of physical treatment, which included: hot pack for 15 minutes, ultrasound therapy (1 W/cm squared) for 5 minutes, and friction massage for 5 minutes (Mean age: 43.6 +/- 9.1) (n=19)
Comparison:
Group II: Patients received a single injection consisting of 20 mg of methylprednisolone and 1 mL of prilocaine (Mean age: 45.7 +/- 10.2) (n=20) Group III: Patients received 10 sessions of extracorporeal shock wave treatment (ESWT) (pressure: 1.4 bar, frequency: 4.0 Hz, number: 500) with a 1 day break between sessions (Mean age: 44.9 +/- 9.9) (n=20)
Outcomes:
The outcomes measured were pain intensity in the lateral epicondyle area (measured using the visual analog scale (VAS)), grip strength (measured using a Jamar hydraulic dynamometer), pinch strength of the first and second fingers (measured using a finger dynamometer), and thickness and cortical abnormalities of the common extensor tendon and bony cortex of the lateral epicondyle (measured using an ultrasonography)
Methods:
RCT: prospective; single center; single-blinded
Time:
All outcomes, besides thickness and abnormality assessments, were measured prior to treatment, and on the 1st month, 3rd month, and 6th month of treatment. Patients were evaluated with the ultrasonography before treatment and 6 months following treatment
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • Clinical findings indicated that there was a significant decrease in VAS scores for all three groups at months 1, 3, and 6 following treatment (p<0.001). VAS scores were similar for all three groups.
  • Clinical results showed there was a significant increase in grip strength values on months 1 and 3 of treatment for Group I (Physiotherapy Group), month 1 for Group II (Injection Group), and months 1, 3, and 6 for Group III (ESWT Group) (Month 1, p<0.003; Months 3 and 6, p<0.001).
  • However, ultrasonographic findings did not correlate with the results regarding improvement in pain scores and grip strength.
  • There was no significant difference in pinch strength values between the three groups (p>0.05).
  • There was no significant difference in the cortical irregularities of the extensor tendon prior to treatment and at 6 months of treatment for all three groups (p>0.05).
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

The clinical findings demonstrated similar reductions in pain, increases in grip strength and finger pinch strength in early stages of LE treatment with physical therapy, corticosteroid injection, and ESWT. However, these changes observed clinically were not supported ultrasonographically. Rather, no differences in thickness and cortical abnormalities of the common extensor tendon and bony cortex of the lateral epicondyle were seen when measured prior and 6 months after treatment.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

Since clinical effects of the LE treatment were not supported ultrasonographically, confusion remains in what the long term effects of physical therapy, corticosteroid injection, and ESWT are. In future studies patients should be blinded in order to lower the potential risk of bias, the population size should be increased, and longer follow-up periods should be used.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Close Dialog
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Clinical, but no ultrasonographic, improvement of lateral epicondylitis with 3 treatments. OE Journal. 2013;1(1):30. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/clinical-but-no-ultrasonographic-improvement-of-lateral-epicondylitis-with-3-treatments

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report