Electroacupuncture for the treatment of supraspinatus calcific tendonitis

Abstract Background Conservative treatment of calcific tendonitis includes rest, medications, and physical therapy. Several physiotherapy interventions such as shockwave therapy are commonly used. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of an electrotherapy method called electroacupunc...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma 2019-05, Vol.10 (3), p.624-628
Hauptverfasser: Papadopoulos, Dimitrios V, Koulouvaris, Panagiotis, Aggelidakis, Georgios, Tsantes, Andreas G, Mavrodontidis, Alexandros, Papadopoulos, Georgios
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Background Conservative treatment of calcific tendonitis includes rest, medications, and physical therapy. Several physiotherapy interventions such as shockwave therapy are commonly used. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of an electrotherapy method called electroacupuncture, in the treatment of calcific tendonitis. Methods 40 patients with calcific tendonitis were randomly divided to receive either a combination of medications and electroacupuncture, or just a course of medications. Evaluated outcomes included pain using the visual analog scale, shoulder range of motion with the use of goniometer, and quality of life along with functional status using the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale (IAOLDS) and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Radiological evaluation for the progression of the calcific deposits was also performed. All these evaluations were performed before and at the end of treatment. A final interview with the patients regarding any recurrent episodes was performed 18–24 months after the end of treatment. Results The intervention group showed greater improvement in pain intensity (2.8 points), range of motion (forward flexion, +30; abduction +29) when compared with the control group (for all, P 
ISSN:0976-5662
2213-3445
DOI:10.1016/j.jcot.2019.02.008