Extracorporeal shockwaves therapy versus corticosteroid injection for the treatment of non-calcific rotator cuff tendinopathies: a randomized trial

IF 0.2 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Safoora Ebadi, Yousef Karimzad, Negar Aflakian, B. Forogh, K. Mansoori, A. Babaei-Ghazani
{"title":"Extracorporeal shockwaves therapy versus corticosteroid injection for the treatment of non-calcific rotator cuff tendinopathies: a randomized trial","authors":"Safoora Ebadi, Yousef Karimzad, Negar Aflakian, B. Forogh, K. Mansoori, A. Babaei-Ghazani","doi":"10.1097/BCO.0000000000001206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Rotator cuff tendinopathy is the most common cause of painful shoulder. There is evidence supporting the use of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in the rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy, but evidence supporting its use in non-calcifying tendinopathy is lacking. The current study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of corticosteroid injections versus ESWT until 3 mo of follow-up for the management of painful non-calcific rotator cuff tendinopathies. Methods: A total of 33 patients affected by painful rotator cuff tendinopathy were randomly divided into 2 groups of 16 and 17 cases. The first group received corticosteroid injection under ultrasound guidance and the second group received three sessions of shockwave within 3 consecutive weeks consisted of 2000 pulse energy, 5 Hz frequency, and pressure of 4 bar using a radial shock wave device. Two outcome measures of VAS and Quick-DASH were obtained to evaluate patients before treatment, and 2 and 12 wk after treatment. Discussion: Regarding both VAS and the score of the Quick-DASH questionnaire, no statistically significant difference was observed between these 2 therapeutic interventions (ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection and shockwave). Both interventions reduced the patient’s pain to the same extent (P-value=0.955 for VAS, and P-value=0.865 for Quick DASH questionnaire score). Moreover, within-group changes showed that both groups’ improvements were significant in the time intervals of 1 to 2 and 1 to 3. Conclusions: Corticosteroid injection and radial shockwave, both can be effective to the same extent in reducing pain and improving function in non-calcific shoulder tendinopathy. Level of Evidence: Level I.","PeriodicalId":10732,"journal":{"name":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","volume":"34 1","pages":"185 - 190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BCO.0000000000001206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Rotator cuff tendinopathy is the most common cause of painful shoulder. There is evidence supporting the use of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in the rotator cuff calcific tendinopathy, but evidence supporting its use in non-calcifying tendinopathy is lacking. The current study aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of corticosteroid injections versus ESWT until 3 mo of follow-up for the management of painful non-calcific rotator cuff tendinopathies. Methods: A total of 33 patients affected by painful rotator cuff tendinopathy were randomly divided into 2 groups of 16 and 17 cases. The first group received corticosteroid injection under ultrasound guidance and the second group received three sessions of shockwave within 3 consecutive weeks consisted of 2000 pulse energy, 5 Hz frequency, and pressure of 4 bar using a radial shock wave device. Two outcome measures of VAS and Quick-DASH were obtained to evaluate patients before treatment, and 2 and 12 wk after treatment. Discussion: Regarding both VAS and the score of the Quick-DASH questionnaire, no statistically significant difference was observed between these 2 therapeutic interventions (ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection and shockwave). Both interventions reduced the patient’s pain to the same extent (P-value=0.955 for VAS, and P-value=0.865 for Quick DASH questionnaire score). Moreover, within-group changes showed that both groups’ improvements were significant in the time intervals of 1 to 2 and 1 to 3. Conclusions: Corticosteroid injection and radial shockwave, both can be effective to the same extent in reducing pain and improving function in non-calcific shoulder tendinopathy. Level of Evidence: Level I.
体外冲击波治疗与皮质类固醇注射治疗非钙化性肩袖肌腱病:一项随机试验
背景:肩袖肌腱病是导致肩部疼痛的最常见原因。有证据支持体外冲击波治疗(ESWT)用于肩袖钙化性腱病变,但缺乏证据支持其用于非钙化性腱疾病。目前的研究旨在比较皮质类固醇注射与ESWT在3个月随访前治疗疼痛的非钙化性肩袖肌腱病的临床有效性。方法:将33例肩袖肌腱病变患者随机分为2组,每组16例和17例。第一组在超声引导下接受皮质类固醇注射,第二组在连续3周内接受三次冲击波治疗,包括2000脉冲能量、5 Hz频率和使用径向冲击波装置的4巴压力。在治疗前以及治疗后2周和12周,获得VAS和Quick DASH两种结果测量方法来评估患者。讨论:关于VAS和Quick DASH问卷的评分,这两种治疗干预措施(超声引导皮质类固醇注射和冲击波)之间没有观察到统计学上的显著差异。两种干预措施都在相同程度上减轻了患者的疼痛(VAS的P值=0.955,Quick DASH问卷得分的P值=0.865)。此外,组内变化显示,两组在1至2和1至3的时间间隔内都有显著改善。结论:皮质类固醇注射和放射状冲击波治疗非钙化性肩腱病,可在相同程度上减轻疼痛,改善功能。证据级别:一级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Current Orthopaedic Practice is a peer-reviewed, general orthopaedic journal that translates clinical research into best practices for diagnosing, treating, and managing musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical research, invited special focus reviews and general reviews, as well as original articles on innovations in practice, case reports, point/counterpoint, and diagnostic imaging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信