| 摘要: |
| 目的 探讨体外冲击波结合关节松动术治疗肩袖部分损伤的治疗效果。方法 选取2020年1月至2021年1月在海军军医大学（第二军医大学）第一附属医院就诊的75例肩袖部分损伤合并肩关节僵硬患者作为研究对象，随机分为3组：冲击波组、关节松动术组和冲击波结合关节松动术组，每组25例。对冲击波组患者予体外冲击波及常规理疗（干扰电、短波等）和运动指导，对关节松动术组患者予关节松动术治疗及常规理疗和运动指导，对冲击波结合关节松动术组患者予冲击波结合关节松动术治疗及常规理疗和运动指导。治疗3周后比较3组患者的临床治疗效果。结果 治疗3周后，3组患者视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分均降低，加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校（UCLA）肩关节评分均增加，各组与治疗前相比差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.01）；冲击波结合关节松动术组患者VAS评分[（1.80±1.08）分]低于冲击波组[（3.08±1.44）分]和关节松动术组[（2.96±1.57）分]，UCLA肩关节评分[（27.44±1.96）分]高于冲击波组[（24.76±2.24）分]和关节松动术组[（22.92±3.93）分]，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。冲击波结合关节松动术组的总有效率[92.00%（23/25）]高于冲击波组[72.00%（18/25）]和关节松动术组[76.00%（19/25）]，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。结论 体外冲击波结合关节松动术治疗肩袖部分损伤相比单纯冲击波或关节松动术有更好的短期疗效。 |
| 关键词: 肩袖损伤 肩关节僵硬 体外冲击波 关节松动术 |
| DOI：10.16781/j.CN31-2187/R.20211074 |
| 投稿时间：2021-10-25修订日期：2023-03-07 |
| 基金项目:国家自然科学基金面上项目（81972060，81572211）. |
|
| Extracorporeal shock wave combined with joint mobilization in treatment of partial rotator cuff injury with shoulder stiffness: an observation of short-term outcomes |
| SHAO Quanwei1,NIAN Shensheng2,LIU Kang2,YAO Gai2,FU Xiawei2,WANG Zimin2* |
(1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Yangpu Central Hospital, Shanghai 200090, China;
2. Department of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Second Military Medical University), Shanghai 200433, China
*Corresponding author) |
| Abstract: |
| Objective To explore the therapeutic effect of extracorporeal shock wave combined with joint mobilization in the treatment of partial rotator cuff injury. Methods A total of 75 patients with partial rotator cuff injury and shoulder stiffness treated in The First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (Second Military Medical University) from Jan. 2020 to Jan. 2021 were enrolled and were randomly divided into 3 groups:shock wave group (group A), joint mobilization group (group B), and shock wave combined with joint mobilization group (group C), with 25 cases in each group. The patients in group A were treated with extracorporeal shock wave and routine physiotherapy (interference electricity, shortwave, etc.) and were offered exercise guidance. The patients in group B were treated with joint mobilization and routine physiotherapy and were offered exercise guidance. The patients in group C were treated with extracorporeal shock wave combined with joint mobilization, routine physiotherapy and were offered exercise guidance. The clinical effects of the 3 groups were compared after 3 weeks of treatment. Results After 3 weeks of treatment, the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of the 3 groups were decreased, and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder joint scores were increased, and the differences were statistically significant in each group compared with those before treatment (all P<0.01). The VAS score of group C (1.80±1.08) was significantly lower than that of group A (3.08±1.44) or group B (2.96±1.57) after treatment (both P<0.05). The UCLA shoulder joint scores of group C (27.44±1.96) were significantly higher than those of group A (24.76±2.24) or group B (22.92±3.93) (both P<0.05). The total effective rate of group C (92.00%[23/25]) was significantly higher than that of group A (72.00%[18/25]) or group B (76.00%[19/25]) (both P<0.05). Conclusion Extracorporeal shock wave combined with joint mobilization has a better short-term effect in the treatment of partial rotator cuff injury than extracorporeal shock wave or joint mobilization alone. |
| Key words: rotator cuff injuries shoulder stiffness extracorporeal shock wave joint mobilization |
