Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To evaluate and compare the effects of radial and focused types of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on lateral epicondylitis.
Study Design: 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.
Methodology: 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.
Results: 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).
Conclusion: 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.
Key Words: Lateral epicondylitis, Shock wave, Randomised sham-controlled trial.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.29271/jcpsp.2023.05.554 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!