The use of dry needling vs. corticosteroid injection to treat lateral epicondylitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

dc.authorid0000-0003-2462-3256
dc.authorid0000-0002-6900-1226
dc.contributor.authorUygur, Esat
dc.contributor.authorAktas, Birol
dc.contributor.authorYilmazoglu, Emime Gul
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-10T19:42:50Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.departmentİstanbul Medeniyet Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractBackground: Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a common disease especially at middle age. Different types of treatments have been used to address LE. Corticosteroid (CS) injections and dry needling (DN) are utilized options in the treatment. However, the question of which one is better has not been entirely discussed in the literature. We hypothesized that the use of DN to treat LE would be at least as effective as using CS injections. We compared the pain relief afforded and improvements in functional disability after DN and CS injection. Methods: A total of 108 LE patients whose pain was not relieved by 3 weeks of first-line treatment were included in a randomized manner, using an online application into DN or CS groups (54 patients each). The minimum follow-up duration was 6 months. We recorded Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation(PRTEE) scores before treatment and after 3 weeks and 6 months of treatment. Results: Seven patients were excluded for various reasons; thus, 101 patients were finally evaluated. Before treatment, the groups were similar in terms of age, symptom duration, and PRTEE score, but after treatment, DN-treated patients showed better improvement in the PRTEE score than CS-treated patients (P < .01). Both treatments were effective (both P < .01). From assessments at 3 weeks and 6 months post-treatment, PRTEE scores decreased over time. Four CS-treated patients (7.6%) developed skin atrophy and whitening. One DN-treated patient (2.04%) could not tolerate the pain of the intervention and withdrew from treatment. Conclusion: DN and CS injection afforded significant improvements during the 6 months of follow-up. However, compared with CS injection, DN was more effective. (C) 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jse.2020.08.044
dc.identifier.endpage139
dc.identifier.issn1058-2746
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.pmid32950674
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85097478008
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage134
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2020.08.044
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14730/10387
dc.identifier.volume30
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000599912200028
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMosby-Elsevier
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250302
dc.subjectDry needling
dc.subjectlateral epicondylalgia
dc.subjectlateral epicondylitis
dc.subjectcorticosteroid
dc.subjectinjection
dc.titleThe use of dry needling vs. corticosteroid injection to treat lateral epicondylitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled study
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket

Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Yükleniyor...
Küçük Resim
İsim:
10387.pdf
Boyut:
4.69 MB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format