4.6 Article

Topical glyceryl trinitrate treatment of chronic patellar tendinopathy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 34-39

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091115

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Center Haaglanden, Leidschendam

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To assess if continuous topical glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) treatment improves outcome in patients with chronic patellar tendinopathy when compared with eccentric training alone. Methods Randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial comparing a 12-week programme of using a GTN or placebo patch in combination with eccentric squats on a decline board. Measurements were performed at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 weeks. Primary outcome measure was the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Patella (VISA-P) questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures were patient satisfaction and pain scores during sports. Generalised estimated equation was used to analyse the treatment, time and treatmentxtime effect. Analyses were performed following the intention-to-treat principle. Results VISA-P scores for both groups improved over the study period to 75.0 +/- 16.2 and 80.7 +/- 22.1 at 24 weeks. Results showed a significant effect for time (p<0.01) but no effect for treatmentxtime (p=0.80). Mean Visual Analogue Scores pain scores during sports for both groups increased over the study period to 6.6 +/- 3 and 7.8 +/- 3.1. Results showed a significant effect for time (p<0.01) but no effect for treatmentxtime (p=0.38). Patient satisfaction showed no difference between GTN and placebo groups (p=0.25) after 24 weeks, but did show a significant difference over time (p=0.01). Three patients in the GTN group reported some rash. Conclusion It seems that continuous topical GTN treatment in addition to an eccentric exercise programme does not improve clinical outcome compared to placebo patches and an eccentric exercise programme in patients with chronic patellar tendinopathy.

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

4.6
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