Dergiler / art / 2016 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3

Comparison of High Intensity Laser and Epicondylitis Bandage in the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis

Dergi
art
Sayfa
234–238
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

However, HILT produced better resting visual analog scale and SF-36 physical component subscale scores compared to LE bandage

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: This study aims to investigate the effects of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) and epicondylitis bandage treatment in patients with lateral epicondylitis (LE).Patients and methods: Sixty-five patients with unilateral LE (18 males, 47 females; mean age 46.5±8.1 years; range 30 to 61 years) with unilateral complaints were included.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The first group (n=31) was treated with HILT for 10 sessions, while the second group (n=34) used only LE bandage for treatment.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:However, HILT produced better resting visual analog scale and SF-36 physical component subscale scores compared to LE bandage
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to investigate the effects of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) and epicondylitis bandage treatment in patients with lateral epicondylitis (LE).Patients and methods: Sixty-five patients with unilateral LE (18 males, 47 females; mean age 46.5±8.1 years; range 30 to 61 years) with unilateral complaints were included. Patients were randomly assigned into two treatment groups. The first group (n=31) was treated with HILT for 10 sessions, while the second group (n=34) used only LE bandage for treatment. The patients were assessed for handgrip strength, pain, disability, and quality of life at baseline and sixth week after treatment by using visual analog scale, the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and Short-Form 36 (SF-36).Results: Both groups showed significant improvement in all evaluated parameters including pain scores, hand grip strength, disability, and SF-36 scores at sixth week after the treatment (all p<0.05). A comparison of percentage changes in parameters between treatment groups did not show a significant difference, except for resting visual analog scale (p=0.036) and SF-36 physical component subscale (p=0.049) scores which indicated better improvement in HILT group.Conclusion: Our findings showed significant improvement in handgrip strength, pain, disability, and quality of life parameters in both groups. However, HILT produced better resting visual analog scale and SF-36 physical component subscale scores compared to LE bandage

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

SALLI, A., AKKURT, E., İZKİ, A. A., ŞEN, Z., YILMAZ, H. (2016). Comparison of High Intensity Laser and Epicondylitis Bandage in the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis. art, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3, 234–238. https://ajindex.com/articles/351739

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Shiri R, Viikari-Juntura E, Varonen H, Heliövaara M. Prevalence and determinants of lateral and medial epicondylitis: a population study. Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:1065-74.
  2. Smidt N, Lewis M, VAN DER Windt DA, Hay EM, Bouter LM, Croft P. Lateral epicondylitis in general practice: course and prognostic indicators of outcome. J Rheumatol 2006;33:2053-9.
  3. Kraushaar BS, Nirschl RP. Tendinosis of the elbow (tennis elbow). Clinical features and findings of histological, immunohistochemical, and electron microscopy studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999;81:259-78.
  4. Wuori JL, Overend TJ, Kramer JF, MacDermid J. Strength and pain measures associated with lateral epicondylitis bracing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79:832-7.
  5. Bisset L, Paungmali A, Vicenzino B, Beller E. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials on physical interventions for lateral epicondylalgia. Br J Sports Med 2005;39:411-22.
  6. Struijs PA, Smidt N, Arola H, van Dijk CN, Buchbinder R, Assendelft WJ. Orthotic devices for tennis elbow: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2001;51:924-9.
  7. Brown AW, Weber DC. Physical agent modalities. In: Braddom RL, editor. Physical medicine and rehabilitation. London: W.B. Saunders; 2000. p. 440-58.
  8. Dundar U, Turkmen U, Toktas H, Ulasli AM, Solak O. Effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy and splinting in lateral epicondylitis; a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Lasers Med Sci 2015;30:1097-107.
  9. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med 1996;29:602-8.
  10. Bohannon RW, Schaubert KL. Test-retest reliability of grip-strength measures obtained over a 12-week interval from community-dwelling elders. J Hand Ther 2005;18:426-7. Ware JE Jr. SF-36 health survey update. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:3130-9.
  11. Bjordal JM, Lopes-Martins RA, Joensen J, Couppe C, Ljunggren AE, Stergioulas A, et al. A systematic review with procedural assessments and meta-analysis of low level laser therapy in lateral elbow tendinopathy (tennis elbow). BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008;9:75. Tumilty S, Munn J, McDonough S, Hurley DA, Basford JR, Baxter GD. Low level laser treatment of tendinopathy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Photomed Laser Surg 2010;28:3-16.
  12. Fiore P, Panza F, Cassatella G, Russo A, Frisardi V, Solfrizzi V, et al. Short-term effects of high- intensity laser therapy versus ultrasound therapy in t