3.8 Article

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy and Physiotherapy in Patients With Moderate Knee Osteoarthritis

期刊

出版社

ARAS PART MEDICAL INT PRESS

关键词

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy; Knee osteoarthritis; Physiotherapy; Exercise

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) has recently been evaluated for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) treatment. The present study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effects of ESWT for the treatment of patients with moderate KOA compared with conventional physiotherapy (PT). Materials and Methods: In this randomized controlled clinical trial, a total of 75 adult patients (70 females and 5 males) with moderate KOA were randomly assigned to ESWT with exercise, PT with exercise, and exercise-only groups. Finally, patients were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), knee range of motion (ROM), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein. Results: In either treatment group, VAS, WOMAC, and TUG significantly improved toward 3 weeks and this improvement sustained until the 7-week follow-up session. In addition, patients' knee ROM significantly improved in the ESWT group throughout the course of the study. Based on the results, no significant difference was observed between the ESWT and PT after 3 weeks and both were superior to exercise alone. In the 7-week evaluation, patients in the ESWT group reported lower pain (50.42% improvement in VAS compared to 30.31%; P < 0.001 and 28.26%; P = 0.008 in PT and exercise groups, respectively) and better improvement in knee extension ROM (P = 0.004 and <0.001, respectively). Conclusions: In general, although PT and ESWT seem to be more effective than exercise alone in the short-term treatment of patients suffering from KOA, medium intensity ESWT is better than PT and exercise in the medium-term rehabilitation of these patients resulting in better pain-relieving and knee ROM improvements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据