体外冲击波与小针刀疗法治疗肱骨内上髁炎疗效比较

 目的 比较体外冲击波疗法及小针刀疗法治疗肱骨内上髁炎的效果。方法 肱骨内上髁炎80例被随机分成两组, 每组40例, 分别行体外冲击波治疗和小针刀治疗, 计算并比较两组术前及术后的VAS疼痛评分、HSS肘关节功能评分。结果 小针刀及体外冲击波疗法均能明显缓解肱骨内上髁炎患者肘关节的疼痛, 两组治疗后VAS评分均低于治疗前, 差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);体外冲击波组治疗后VAS评分低于小针刀组治疗后(1.07±0.66) vs (2.24±0.75)], 差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。两组治疗后HSS评分均高于治疗前, 差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);体外冲击波组治疗后HSS评分高于小针刀组治疗后(92.06±8.07) vs (83.71±7.65)], 差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论 在治疗肱骨内上髁炎疼痛和恢复功能方面, 体外冲击波疗法比小针刀效果更明显。

Comparative study of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and small-needle-knife therapy in treating medial epicondylitis

Objective To discuss and compare the effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and small needle knife therapy in the treatment of medial epicondylitis. Methods Eighly patients with medial epicondylitis were divided into two groups randomly, the extracorporeal shock wave therapy group(ESWT) and the small needle knife therapy group(SNKT).The visual analog scale ( VAS) score, function and overall rating were compared before and after the treatment between the two groups. Results Both therapy relieved pain significantly, the VAS scores in the two groups declined to (2.24±0.75) and (1.07±0.66)(P<0.01), respectively after treatment. The HSS scores recoverd to (83.71±7.65) and (92.06±8.07), respectively, the functions of both elbows recovered significantly(P<0.01) compared with the condition of pre-treatment. The the rapy in ESWT group was more effective than in the SNKT group(P<0.01)in pain and function. Conclusions Both extracorporeal shock wave and the small needle knife therapy can effectively treat medial epicondylitis, extracorporeal shock wave therapy has better Results than the small needle knife therapy.