MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/2309499018792744

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong) · 2018

Vibration therapy versus standard treatment for tennis elbow: A randomized controlled study.

Furness Nicholas Duncan, Phillips Alistair, Gallacher Sian, Beazley James Charles Sherard, Evans Jonathan Peter, Toms Andrew David, Thomas William, Smith Christopher David

СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

AIM: To determine whether a mechanical, high-frequency vibration device (Tenease™) can improve pain and function for the treatment of tennis elbow (TE), compared with standard treatment.

METHODS

Adults presenting to an elbow clinic with a clinical diagnosis of TE were randomized to standard treatment with physiotherapy, activity modification and analgesia or standard treatment plus Tenease therapy. Tenease therapy consisted of a 6-week period of treatment using the Tenease device with three 10-min episodes each day. The primary outcome measure was the quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score at 6 months, with scores also taken at 6 weeks. Secondary outcome measures were the Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Score and EuroQol 5-Dimension Visual Analogue Scale at the same time points.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were recruited into the study. Following randomization and initial dropout, 18 patients were included in the standard group and 27 in the Tenease group. Both groups reported improvements in primary outcome measure scores. The control group had a mean score of 44.3 (standard deviation (SD) = 18.8) at baseline, which dropped to 31.2 (SD = 17.2) at 6 months ( p = 0.002). The Tenease group had a mean score of 43.2 (SD = 22.7) at baseline, which dropped to 23.4 (SD = 15.0) at 6 months ( p = 0.064). Similar improvements were seen in secondary outcome measures with none reaching statistical significance. There were no statistically significant differences seen between the primary outcome scores at 6 weeks ( p = 0.9) or 6 months ( p = 0.5). No complications were noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Vibration therapy did not result in any statistically significant improvement in functional outcome scores compared to standard treatment for TE. It is important to note that this was a relatively small cohort and a high dropout rate was observed.

Для цитирования: Furness Nicholas Duncan, Phillips Alistair, Gallacher Sian, Beazley James Charles Sherard, Evans Jonathan Peter, Toms Andrew David, Thomas William, Smith Christopher David. Vibration therapy versus standard treatment for tennis elbow: A randomized controlled study.. Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong). 2018. DOI: 10.1177/2309499018792744.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.