...
首页> 外文期刊>Pilot and Feasibility Studies >Clinical comparative effectiveness of acupuncture versus manual therapy treatment of lateral epicondylitis: feasibility randomized clinical trial
【24h】

Clinical comparative effectiveness of acupuncture versus manual therapy treatment of lateral epicondylitis: feasibility randomized clinical trial

机译:针刺与手法治疗外侧上con炎的临床比较效果:可行性随机临床试验

获取原文
           

摘要

BackgroundLateral epicondylitis (LE) is a challenging condition for clinicians, and research has yet not proven the superiority of one specific treatment approach. However, manual therapy (elbow mobilization) in addition to eccentric exercise has been found to be superior to exercise alone. As well, acupuncture is effective in short-term pain relief when compared with sham treatment, but there is little knowledge on the comparative effectiveness of manual therapy and acupuncture treatment of LE in terms of pain relief. The primary objective of this pilot trial was to assess the feasibility (retention and adherence rates) of performing a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to explore the clinical effectiveness of acupuncture and manual therapy treatment of LE.MethodsThis pilot trial took place in an outpatient interdisciplinary institute of sports medicine and rehabilitation in Oslo, Norway. Thirty-six adults with clinically diagnosed LE were randomly allocated into one of three groups: eccentric exercise alone, eccentric exercise plus acupuncture, or eccentric exercise plus manual therapy for a 12-week treatment period. Primary outcomes were patient retention and adherence rates. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported pain (NRS), level of disability (Quick-DASH), and participant’s satisfaction with treatment and global perceived effect.ResultsNine (69%) patients in the acupuncture group completed the 1-year follow-up, compared to eight (67%) in the manual therapy group and five (45%) in exercise alone. Our goal was to demonstrate a retention rate above 80% to avoid serious threats to validity, but the result was lower than expected. The majority of participants (64%) in both treatment groups received only three-treatment sessions; the reasons included non-attendance or recovery from pain. Secondary outcomes support the rationale for conduction of an RCT. There were no adverse advents related to study participation.ConclusionsBased on differences in pain relief between groups, patient retention, and adherence rates, an RCT seems to be feasible to assess treatment effectiveness more precisely. In a future definitive trial, greater dropout may be reduced by maintaining contact with the participants in the exercise alone group throughout the intervention, and objective assessments might be considered.
机译:背景上睑上睑炎(LE)对临床医生来说是一个具有挑战性的疾病,并且研究尚未证明一种特定治疗方法的优越性。但是,除了离心运动之外,还发现手动疗法(肘部动员)优于单独运动。同样,与假手术相比,针灸可有效缓解短期疼痛,但就疼痛缓解而言,关于LE的手法治疗和针刺治疗的相对有效性知之甚少。该试验性试验的主要目的是评估进行随机对照试验(RCT)的可行性(保留率和依从率),以探讨针灸和手法治疗LE的临床有效性。方法该试验试验在门诊跨学科患者中进行挪威奥斯陆运动医学与康复研究所。将36名经临床诊断为LE的成年人随机分为三组之一:单独进行离心运动,离心运动加针灸或离心运动加手动疗法,为期12周。主要结果是患者保留率和依从率。次要结局包括患者报告的疼痛(NRS),残疾水平(Quick-DASH)以及参与者对治疗和总体感觉效果的满意度。结果针灸组中有9例(69%)患者完成了1年随访手动疗法组中有八(67%)人,单独运动中有五(45%)人。我们的目标是证明保留率超过80%,以避免严重影响有效性,但结果却低于预期。两个治疗组的大多数参与者(64%)仅接受了三个治疗疗程。原因包括没有就诊或疼痛恢复。次要结果支持进行RCT的基本原理。结论:基于各组之间疼痛缓解,患者保留和依从率的差异,RCT似乎可以更准确地评估治疗效果。在未来的确定性试验中,可以通过在整个干预过程中保持与单独运动组参与者的接触来减少更大的辍学率,并且可以考虑进行客观评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号