COMPARATIVE STUDY REGARDING THE BENEFITS OF USING MEDICAL FLOSSING IN LATERAL EPICONDYLITIS

Abstract

Although there are multiple published reviews about the effects of the most common techniques, such as stretching or the use of foam roller on the range of motion (Behm et al., 2016; Wilke et al., 2020) or performance parameters (Behm & Wilke, 2019; Konrad et al., 2021), there is no analysis on the effects of medical flossing. To date, two reviews have been publishedabout effectiveness of using ankle flossing to improve dorsiflexion amplitude or jump performance (Pisz et al., 2020; Kielur & Powden, 2020). This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of medical flossing added to routine treatment in patients with epicondylitis, compared to conventional physiotherapy treatment. The study included 6 subjects who showed localized pain in the area of the lateral epicondyle exacerbated with the Cozen test. The other criteria for selecting patients were the duration of the symptoms, less than 3 months from the onset of the disease and pain intensity more than 5 on the Visual Analog scale.To monitor the evolution of the subjects involved, we used a visual analog pain scale to assess the intensity of pain at different times during the application of therapy, before and after the end of the treatment. Another tool used to measure the degree of pain and dysfunction was the PRTEE Questionnaire (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation). The rehabilitation program took place between August and September 2021, for 30 days, with afrequency of 3 times per week. 6 patients with lateral epicondylitis were included and medical flossing was used only in the case of 3 patients at each therapy session. The differences between groups at the time of the initial assessment, in terms of pain intensity were statistically insignificant (p=0.288, p>0.05). The results obtained in terms of decreasing pain were in favor of the use of medical flossing as an adjuvant method in specific pain existing in lateral epicondylitis. Although in both groups there was a decrease in pain after 4 weeks of treatment, the intervention group recorded significant reduced values compared to the control group (p=0.024; p<0.05). Regarding PRTEE Functional Score, at the final assesment there was a decrease in both groups, which means the functional condition of the patients has improved.