scholarly journals Manipulation Therapy Relieved Pain More Rapidly Than Acupuncture among Lateral Epicondylalgia (Tennis Elbow) Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 8-Week Follow-Up

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chung-Yuan Hsu ◽  
Ko-Hung Lee ◽  
Hsin-Chia Huang ◽  
Zi-Yu Chang ◽  
Hsing-Yu Chen ◽  
...  

Radial bone adjustment manipulation treatment may be effective to reduce pain rapidly in lateral epicondylalgia patients and the pathological tension in the biceps brachii muscle is highly concerned. To prove this hypothesis, we conducted a randomized controlled trial and included 35 patients with lateral epicondylalgia for more than 2 months. Either manipulation treatment (n=16) or acupuncture (n=19) was given to these patients for 2 weeks and all patients’ symptoms were followed up for 8 weeks after treatment. Both groups demonstrated changes in pain VAS score, grip strength, and DASH questionnaire. Lateral epicondylalgia patients who received manipulation treatment felt pain relief sooner than those who had acupuncture treatments during the first few treatments. However, both acupuncture and manipulation are effective, while the difference has no significance at the 8-week follow-up. The trial was registered with Current Controlled TrialsISRCTN81308551on 5 February 2016.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Kudlow ◽  
Tashauna Brown

BACKGROUND There are limited evidence-based strategies that have been shown to increase the rate at which peer-reviewed articles are cited. In a previously reported randomized controlled trial we demonstrated that promotion of article links in an online cross-publisher distribution platform (TrendMD) persistently augments citation rates after 12 months, leading to a statistically significant, 50% increase in citations relative to control. OBJECTIVE To investigate if the citation advantage of promoted articles upholds after 36-months. METHODS Three thousand two hundred articles published in 64 peer-reviewed journals across eight subject areas were block randomized at the subject level to either the TrendMD group (n=1600) or the control group (n=1600) of the study. Articles were promoted in the TrendMD Network for 6 months. We compared the citation rates in both groups after 36 months. RESULTS At 36 months, we found the citation advantage endured; articles randomized to TrendMD showed a 28% increase in mean citations relative to control. The difference in mean citations at 36 months for articles randomized to TrendMD versus control was 10.52, 95% CI [3.79, 17.25] and was statistically significant (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to demonstrate how a post-publication article promotion intervention can be used to persistently augment citations of peer-reviewed articles. TrendMD is an efficient digital tool for knowledge translation and dissemination to targeted audiences to facilitate uptake of research.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramesh S. Koujalagi ◽  
V. M. Uppin ◽  
Soham Shah ◽  
Dron Sharma

Background: The objective of the study is to find out the effect of honey dressing versus povidone iodine dressing for reduction of wound size in diabetic foot ulcer.Methods: This randomized controlled trial was done in the Department of General Surgery, KLES Dr. Prabhakar Kore Hospital, Belagavi from January 2017 to December 2017. 64 patients were randomized into 32 group each undergoing unprocessed honey dressing and other group undergoing povidone iodine dressing.Results: The mean wound size in honey dressing was 23.16 cm2 and 23.03 cm2 in povidone dressings  at baseline, 23.16 cm2 and 22.94 cm2 at 1st day follow up, 23.16 cm2 and 22.94 cm2 at 3rd day follow up, 19.38 cm2 and  20.28 cm2 at 5th day follow up, 16.13 cm2 and 17.06 cm2 at 7th day follow up, 12.44 cm2 and  16.13 cm2 at 10th day follow up and the end of 15th day, it was 10.69 cm2 and 15.06 cm2 respectively in honey dressing group and povidone dressing group. The difference in the wound size in honey dressing group and povidone dressing group at 1st day, 3rd day, 5th day, 7th day, 10th day follow up period were statistically not significant (p>0.05). The difference in the wound size in honey dressing group at 15th day follow up period were statistically significant (p<0.05).Conclusions: This study shows more favorable results with honey dressing for reduction of wound size in diabetic foot ulcers.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 2068 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Rodríguez-Huguet ◽  
Jorge Góngora-Rodríguez ◽  
Rafael Lomas-Vega ◽  
Rocío Martín-Valero ◽  
Ángeles Díaz-Fernández ◽  
...  

Few studies have considered the effects of percutaneous electrolysis (PE) in the treatment of lateral epicondylalgia (LE). For this reason, the objective of this study was to compare the effects of PE with an evidence-based approach—trigger point dry needling (TDN)—in patients with LE. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in which 32 participants with LE were randomly assigned to two treatment groups, the PE group (n = 16) and the TDN group (n = 16). Both groups received four therapy sessions and an eccentric exercise program to be performed daily. The numerical pain rating scale (NPRS), pressure pain thresholds (PPT), quality of life, and range of motion were measured before treatment, at the end of treatment, and at one- and three-month follow-ups. Significant between-group mean differences were found after treatment for NPRS (p < 0.001) and flexion movement (p = 0.006). At one-month follow-up, significant mean differences between groups were found for NPRS (p < 0.001), PPT (p = 0.021), and flexion (p = 0.036). At three-months follow-up, significant mean differences between groups were found for NPRS (p < 0.001), PPT (p = 0.004), and flexion (p = 0.003). This study provides evidence that PE could be more effective than TDN for short- and medium-term improvement of pain and PPTs in LE when added to an eccentric exercise program.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 80.1-81
Author(s):  
C. Lukas ◽  
A. Tournadre ◽  
M. C. Picot ◽  
E. Nogué ◽  
E. Dernis ◽  
...  

Background:Anti-TNF treatments (TNFi) have shown high efficacy in axial spondyloarthritis (ax-SpA) with inadequate response to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). However their effect remains predominantly symptomatic, and their long-term tolerance as well as significant societal cost justify investigation about a potential reduction in drug dosage, or –most feasible and comfortable for the patient– increase in intervals between doses.Objectives:To assess if a progressive and monitored reduction of administered TNFi by increase of intervals between injections results in a comparable proportion of patients remaining after 12 months (m) in low disease activity state despite a decreased cumulative treatment dose received.Methods:Non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, having included adult patients with ax-SpA fulfilling ASAS criteria, already treated by anti-TNF, and in stable low disease activity for at least 6 m (current and at least 6 m old BASDAI<4/10), who were randomized into 2 groups: either keeping on their usual treatment with stable doses (“unchanged” group), or progressive spacing of injections of their treatment (“spacing” group). Follow-up was done every 3 m during 12 m, with regular monitoring of disease activity and, in patients from the group “spacing”, modification of the rhythm of injections according to disease activity and predefined standardized protocol (either increase or decrease (step-back) of intervals between injections). The primary endpoint was the difference of proportions of patients having a low disease activity state (BASDAI<4/10) after 12 m of follow-up between the 2 groups. It was estimated on the ITT population after multiple imputation. The 90% confidence interval associated was calculated using the Farrington-Manning method and the lower bound was compared to the non-inferiority margin of -20%. With an expected proportion of 85% patients remaining in low disease activity in the unchanged group, and α and β risks at respectively 5% and 90%, the required number of patients was calculated at 358, and thus 398 had to be included with a 10% expected proportion of patients with unavailable data.Results:398 patients were randomized in 23 French rheumatology units (197 and 201 in the spacing and unchanged groups respectively), and 389 included in analyses (9 did not receive the allocated treatment). Mean (SD) age was 44.3 (12.4) years, 71.2% were males. Mean (SD) BASDAI at inclusion was 1.45 (1.02). TNFi used were etanercept (35.7%), adalimumab (33.9%), infliximab (20.6%), golimumab (9.3%) and certolizumab (0.5%). For the 373 patients with complete follow-up (93.7%), 162/184 (88.0%) had a low disease activity in the “spacing” group vs. 173/189 (91.5%) in the “unchanged” group at 12 m. After multiple imputation for the 16 patients with missing data, the difference of proportion between the two groups was estimated to -4.18% [CI90% -10.0; 1.7], thus confirming the non-inferiority of the “spacing” procedure. In the “spacing” group at 12 m, 134/162 (82.7%) patients in low disease activity were still receiving a lowered TNFi dose.Conclusion:In ax-SpA patients with BASDAI<4 for at least 6 months under TNFi, it is possible to increase intervals between injections while maintaining a low disease activity by adjusting treatment with quarterly monitoring of SpA activity.Disclosure of Interests:Cédric Lukas Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, UCB, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis and Roche-Chugai, Anne Tournadre Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Fresenius, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Roche Chugai, Sanofi, Paid instructor for: Fresenius, Consultant of: Abbvie, Fresenius, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Fresenius, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Marie Christine Picot: None declared, Erika Nogué: None declared, Emmanuelle Dernis Speakers bureau: Roche chugai, UCB, BMS, Novartis, Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Celgène, Consultant of: UCB, MSD, BMS, Lilly, Novartis, Philippe Goupille Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Janssen, Lilly, Medac, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB, Bernard Combe Speakers bureau: AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead; Janssen; Lilly; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; and Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead; Janssen; Lilly; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; and Sanofi, Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche-Chugai, Jacques Morel Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Galpaagos, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document