Greater trochanteric pain syndrome: focused shockwave therapy versus an ultrasound guided injection: a randomised control trial.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 34784804.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1177/11207000211060396.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is a common problem with an incidence of 1.8-5.6 per 1000 population. Physiotherapy, anti-inflammatories, corticosteroid injections and surgery have all been described in the management of GTPS, with limited, temporal success. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) has been proposed as a potential non-invasive management option for this difficult presentation. We ran a prospective, 2-arm, single-blinded, randomised control trial comparing focused shockwave therapy (f-ESWT) to an ultrasound guided corticosteroid injection. Primary outcome measure was the visual analogue pain score. Secondary outcome measures included the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Trendelenburg test for function; SF-36 for quality of life (QoL); and a Likert scale question for subjective assessment of symptom improvement. 104 patients (10 males and 94 females), of mean age 61.5 years were recruited. 53 were randomised to receive ESWT and 51 to receive an image-guided injection. 11 patients were lost to follow-up. There were no significant differences in baseline scores between groups.At 3 months, pain, function and QoL scores had improved in both groups but were not statistically significant. The Trendelenburg test was significantly improved in the f-ESWT group with 80% patients being negative compared to 20% at baseline (<i>p</i> <i><</i> 0.001).At 12 months, across all outcomes, the ESWT group had significantly improved scores compared to the injection group; VAS 37.1 versus 55.0 (<i>p</i> = 0.007, 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.3-30.8), HHS 69.7 versus 57.5 (<i>p</i> = 0.002, 95% CI, -20.0 to -4.6) and SF-36 52.4 versus 47.7 (<i>p</i> = 0.048, 95% CI, -9.31 to -0.04). The improvement in Trendelenburg test was maintained in the ESWT group, but the injection group had reverted to baseline (<i>p</i> < 0.001). We have shown f-ESWT is an effective treatment for patients with GTPS. We would advocate f-ESWT as an effective non-invasive treatment modality for this challenging patient population.<b>Trial Registration No.</b> ISRCTN8338223.
Medical subject headings
- Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy
- High-Energy Shock Waves
- Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip
- Bursitis
Anatomy
- hip