Effectiveness of Microelectrolysis Associated With Exercises Versus Exercises Alone on Pain Intensity and Disability in Individuals With Chronic Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.10.016
Geraldo Carvalho Magalhães, Danilo Harudy Kamonseki, Ana Catarine Tavares da Silva, Janaynna Araújo Nunes, Antonio Ismayle Araújo Firmino de Sousa, Daniel Cury Ribeiro, Valéria Mayaly Alves de Oliveira
{"title":"Effectiveness of Microelectrolysis Associated With Exercises Versus Exercises Alone on Pain Intensity and Disability in Individuals With Chronic Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Geraldo Carvalho Magalhães, Danilo Harudy Kamonseki, Ana Catarine Tavares da Silva, Janaynna Araújo Nunes, Antonio Ismayle Araújo Firmino de Sousa, Daniel Cury Ribeiro, Valéria Mayaly Alves de Oliveira","doi":"10.1016/j.apmr.2024.10.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effectiveness of intratissue percutaneous microelectrolysis (IPM) in addition to shoulder exercise program on pain intensity and disability in individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Two parallel arms, single-blind superiority randomized controlled trial. SITE: Outpatient clinic (Alcides Carneiro University Hospital).</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Forty-two individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy were randomly allocated (1:1) into 2 groups: IPM associated with exercises (IPM+Ex) and exercises only (Ex).</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Both groups underwent a therapeutic exercise program (6 in-person sessions) conducted by a physiotherapist, but only the IPM+Ex group received additional treatment with IPM (6 sessions). Linear mixed models were used to compare groups.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Pain intensity was measured with the Numerical Pain Rating Scale and shoulder disability with the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. The outcomes were evaluated (blinded assessor) at baseline and 8 weeks after the intervention protocol. The secondary outcomes included adverse effects, frequency of the weekly home exercises, and overall perceived effect.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty individuals completed the 8-week follow-up. There were statistically significant within-group changes in both IPM+Ex and Ex for pain (IPM+Ex: mean difference -3.19; 95% CI: -4.45 to -1.94; Ex: mean difference: -3.99; 95% CI: -5.27 to -2.72) and disability (IPM+Ex: mean difference -35.76; 95% CI: -47.77 to -23.76; Ex: mean difference: -38.26; 95% CI: -50.45 to -26.07). We found no between-group significant differences in either pain (mean difference: -1.23; 95% CI: -2.54, 0.07) or disability (mean difference 7.17; 95% CI: -7.02, 21.35). We found no differences between the groups (P<.05) regarding adverse effects, frequency of the weekly home exercises, and overall perceived effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Applying IPM along with therapeutic exercises does not have additional effects on pain intensity and disability in individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy.</p>","PeriodicalId":8313,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2024.10.016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of intratissue percutaneous microelectrolysis (IPM) in addition to shoulder exercise program on pain intensity and disability in individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy.

Study design: Two parallel arms, single-blind superiority randomized controlled trial. SITE: Outpatient clinic (Alcides Carneiro University Hospital).

Participants: Forty-two individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy were randomly allocated (1:1) into 2 groups: IPM associated with exercises (IPM+Ex) and exercises only (Ex).

Interventions: Both groups underwent a therapeutic exercise program (6 in-person sessions) conducted by a physiotherapist, but only the IPM+Ex group received additional treatment with IPM (6 sessions). Linear mixed models were used to compare groups.

Main outcome measures: Pain intensity was measured with the Numerical Pain Rating Scale and shoulder disability with the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. The outcomes were evaluated (blinded assessor) at baseline and 8 weeks after the intervention protocol. The secondary outcomes included adverse effects, frequency of the weekly home exercises, and overall perceived effect.

Results: Forty individuals completed the 8-week follow-up. There were statistically significant within-group changes in both IPM+Ex and Ex for pain (IPM+Ex: mean difference -3.19; 95% CI: -4.45 to -1.94; Ex: mean difference: -3.99; 95% CI: -5.27 to -2.72) and disability (IPM+Ex: mean difference -35.76; 95% CI: -47.77 to -23.76; Ex: mean difference: -38.26; 95% CI: -50.45 to -26.07). We found no between-group significant differences in either pain (mean difference: -1.23; 95% CI: -2.54, 0.07) or disability (mean difference 7.17; 95% CI: -7.02, 21.35). We found no differences between the groups (P<.05) regarding adverse effects, frequency of the weekly home exercises, and overall perceived effect.

Conclusion: Applying IPM along with therapeutic exercises does not have additional effects on pain intensity and disability in individuals with rotator cuff tendinopathy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
微电解联合运动与单独运动对慢性肩袖肌腱病患者疼痛强度和残疾的疗效对比:随机临床试验。
研究目的比较组织内经皮微电解术(IPM)与肩部锻炼计划对肩袖肌腱病患者疼痛强度和残疾程度的影响:研究设计:双臂平行、单盲优效随机对照临床试验。研究地点:门诊部(阿尔卡特门诊(阿尔西德斯-卡内罗大学医院) 参与者:42 名肩袖肌腱病患者被随机分配(1:1)为 2 组:干预措施:干预措施:两组均接受由理疗师实施的治疗性锻炼计划(6 次上门课程),但只有 IPM+Ex 组接受了 IPM 的额外治疗(6 次课程)。采用线性混合模型对各组进行比较:主要结果测量:疼痛强度用数字疼痛评定量表(NPRS)测量,肩部残疾用肩部疼痛和残疾指数(SPADI)测量。次要结果:不良反应、每周在家锻炼的频率和总体效果:结果:40 人完成了为期 8 周的随访。IPM+Ex和Ex在疼痛方面的组内变化具有统计学意义(IPM+Ex:平均差异为-3.19;95% CI:-4.45至-1.94;Ex:平均差异为-3.99;95% CI:-1.94):-3.99;95% CI:-5.27 至 -2.72)和残疾(IPM+Ex:平均差异 -35.76;95% CI:-47.77 至 -23.76;Ex:平均差异:-38.26;95% CI:-50.45 至 -26.07)。我们发现,组间疼痛(平均差异:-1.23;95% CI:-2.54,0.07)或残疾(平均差异:7.17;95% CI:-7.02,21.35)均无显著差异。我们发现,在不良反应、每周家庭锻炼的频率和总体效果感知方面,组间没有差异(P < 0.05):结论:在进行治疗性锻炼的同时应用 IPM 不会对肩袖肌腱病患者的疼痛强度和残疾程度产生额外的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.70%
发文量
495
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: The Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation publishes original, peer-reviewed research and clinical reports on important trends and developments in physical medicine and rehabilitation and related fields. This international journal brings researchers and clinicians authoritative information on the therapeutic utilization of physical, behavioral and pharmaceutical agents in providing comprehensive care for individuals with chronic illness and disabilities. Archives began publication in 1920, publishes monthly, and is the official journal of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Its papers are cited more often than any other rehabilitation journal.
期刊最新文献
Reliability and validity of instrumented timed up and go test in typical adults and elderly: a systematic review. Pneumonia Prolongs Rehabilitation Length of Stay and Induces Excess Costs in Adults with Acute Spinal Cord Injury: A Causal Inference Study Using Prospective Multi-Center Data. Technology-Based Physical Rehabilitation for Balance in people with Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Development of a Multidimensional, Multigroup Measure of Cognitive-Communication for Inpatient Rehabilitation. Masthead
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1