It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The study's goal was to compare and evaluate the benefits of deep friction massage and ultrasonic therapy (US) vs extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) for people with lateral epicondylitis. This double-blind, parallel-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted after ethical approval on a sample of 80 subjects with lateral epicondylitis. Participants were enrolled based on predefined eligibility criteria. They were randomly allocated to groups A and B. Group A received ESWT, while Group B received the US combined with deep friction massage. Data was collected using the Numeric Pain Rating Score (NPRS) and Patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation questionnaire (PRTEE) at baseline, at 3rd, and at 7th week of treatment. On the basis of the normality of the data, a non-parametric test was applied to evaluate between-group and within-group differences. P value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. There was a significant difference between groups (p < 0.001). Comparisons of PRTEE scores at 3rd week and 7th week of intervention were found significant for both groups (p < 0.001). While considering between-group comparisons based on percentile scores of PRTEE at baseline, 3rd and 7th week of intervention, in group A Median (IQR) at the baseline was 24.00 (5.00), at 3rd week, 10.00 (5.00) and 7th week was 1.50 (2.50) and in group B Median (IQR) at the baseline was 25.00 (4.00), at 3rd week 19.50 (4.50) and at 7th week was 11.50 (2.50). The results were significant in both groups (p = 0.000), but between-group analysis revealed that ESWT is more effective in patients with lateral epicondylitis.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 CMH Lahore Medical College & IOD (NUMS Rawalpindi), Lahore Cantt, Pakistan
2 Lahore University of Biological and Applied Science, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan (GRID:grid.440564.7) (ISNI:0000 0001 0415 4232)
3 Syed Medical Complex, Department of Physical Therapy, Sialkot, Pakistan (GRID:grid.440564.7)
4 Avicenna Medical College, Department of Physical Therapy, Lahore, Pakistan (GRID:grid.440564.7)
5 CMH Lahore Medical College & IOD (NUMS Rawalpindi), Lahore Cantt, Pakistan (GRID:grid.440564.7)
6 Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Department of Physical Therapy, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Dammam, Saudi Arabia (GRID:grid.411975.f) (ISNI:0000 0004 0607 035X)
7 King Saud University, Rehabilitation Research Chair, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (GRID:grid.56302.32) (ISNI:0000 0004 1773 5396)