The Short Term Effects of Shock-Wave Therapy for Tennis Elbow: a Clinical Trial Study

Rehabilitation of the Canine Forelimb

The goal of rehabilitation is to restore function and mobility and reduce pain associated with chronic disease. In human medicine, physical therapy is standard of care for acute and chronic injuries and an integral component of postoperative recovery. Although there is a dearth of evidence-based veterinary medical studies in rehabilitation therapy and modalities for forelimb injuries in dogs, some extrapolation from human medicine can be made and applied. When developing a rehabilitation and therapeutic plan, the biomechanics of the affected limb and timeline of tissue healing of the target tissue and/or joint are important to consider.

Shock-wave therapy versus corticosteroid injection on lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: Shock-wave (SW) therapy has been widely promoted and proven to be effective in ameliorating symptoms of lateral epicondylitis (LE) during recent years. Corticosteroid (CS) injection is another common treatment of LE, and several researches have documented its significant effect in the treatment of LE. Despite this, few studies have focused on comparing the use of SW and CS in the treatment of LE. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess whether SW is superior to CS in managing LE, both in terms of ameliorating pain and improving functionality. Methods: A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify relevant articles that were published in Pubmed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, SpringerLink, Clinical Trials.gov and OVID from the databases' inception to December 2018. All studies comparing the efficacy of SW and CS in terms of pain levels and functionality improvement were included. Data on the two primary outcomes were collected and analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3. Results: Four studies were included in the current meta-analysis. A significant difference in VAS score (SMD = 1.13, Cl 0.72-1.55 P < 0.00001, I² = 0) was noted between the SW group and the CS group. Furthermore, Significant difference was also seen in the term of grip strength (including HGS and GSS scoring system) (SMD = -1.42, Cl -1.85--0.98 P < 0.00001, I² = 0). Conclusions: In light of the better improvement in the terms of VAS and grip strength with follow-up more than 12 weeks, we assume that SW may be a superior alternative for the treatment of LE.

A comparative study of the efficacy of ultrasonics and extracorporeal shock wave in the treatment of tennis elbow: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Tennis elbow or lateral epicondylitis is a common source of pain among craftsmen. Although it cannot be completely resolved, extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and ultrasonics (US) have been found to be effective for tennis elbow as highlighted in previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and reviews. However, the efficacy of these two therapies in treating tennis elbow is unknown. This meta-analysis compares the effectiveness of ESWT and US in relieving pain and restoring the functions of tennis elbow following tendinopathy.

METHODS

RCTs published in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SpringerLink databases comparing ESWT and US in treating tennis elbow were identified by a software and manual search. The risk of bias and clinical relevance of the included studies were assessed. Publication bias was explored using funnel plot and statistical tests (Egger's test and Begg's test). The major outcomes of the studies were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Five RCTs comprising five patients were included in the present meta-analysis. The results revealed a significantly lower VAS score of pain in the ESWT group (1 month: MD = 4.47, p = 0.0001; 3 months: MD = 20.32, p < 0.00001; and 6 months: MD = 4.32, p < 0.0001) compared to US. Besides, the grip strength was markedly higher 3 months after the intervention in ESWT (MD = 8.87, p < 0.00001) than in the US group. Although no significant difference was observed in the scores of the elbow function after 3 months of treatment (SMD = 1.51, p = 0.13), the subjective scores of elbow functions were found to be better in the ESWT group (SMD = 3.34; p = 0.0008) compared to the US group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there was no significant difference in the elbow function evaluation scores between ESWT and US, the superiority of the ESWT group in the VAS of pain (both at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months follow-ups) raised grip strength in ESWT group and the scores for subjective evaluation of efficacy indicated that ESWT offers more effective therapy for lateral epicondylitis than US therapy.