| Literature DB >> 29153594 |
Esra Circi1, Sibel Caglar Okur2, Ozge Aksu2, Erhan Mumcuoglu3, Tolga Tuzuner3, Nil Caglar2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the subacromial impingement syndrome and its relationship with the acromion morphology.Entities:
Keywords: Acromion morphology; Extracorporeal shock wave therapy(ESWT); Subacromial impingement syndrome
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29153594 PMCID: PMC6136340 DOI: 10.1016/j.aott.2017.10.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc ISSN: 1017-995X Impact factor: 1.511
Fig. 1aSchematic figure for acromion types.
Fig. 1bType 2 acromion according to the supraspinatus outlet graphic.
Demographic features of the patients.
| Sex (n = 30) | 24 women/6 men |
|---|---|
| Acromion type 1 | 13 patient |
| Acromion type 2 | 11 patient |
| Acromion type 3 | 6 patient |
| Side | 24 right shoulder/6 left shoulder |
| Age (year) | 53.6 ± 9.8 (39–80) |
Mean ± standard deviation (minimum–maximum value).
The age distribution of patients according to the type of acromion.
| Acromion type 1 | Acromion type 2 | Acromion type 3 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 51.2 ± 7.7 (39–64) | 57.5 ± 12.6 (41–80) | 52.0 ± 6.9 (43–76) | P = 0.47* |
Mean ± standard deviation (minimum–maximum value), * one way ANOVA test.
Functional evaluation results before and after ESWT for all patients.
| Before ESWT | After ESWT | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| SPADI pain score | 16.1 ± 5.1 (7–25) | 10.4 ± 4.9 (1–20) | P < 0.001* |
| SPADI functional score | 37.3 ± 19.8 (5–70) | 26.7 ± 17.5 (1–60) | P < 0.001* |
| SPADI total score | 53.4 ± 24.5 (14–95) | 37.1 ± 21.6 (2–74) | P < 0.001* |
Mean ± standard deviation (minimum–maximum value), *paired t test.
Functional evaluation results before and after ESWT according to acromion type.
| Acromion type 1 | Acromion type 2 | Acromion type 3 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before ESWT | After ESWT | Before ESWT | After ESWT | Before ESWT | After ESWT | ||||
| SPADI pain score | 15.1 ± 4.9 (7–22) | 9.9 ± 4.8 (1–16) | P = 0.003 | 17.0 ± 4.8 (9–25) | 10.8 ± 6.1 (3–20) | P = 0.025 | 16.8 ± 6.7 (9–22) | 11.2 ± 3.1 (8–15) | P = 0.049 |
| SPADI functional score | 32.7 ± 17.7 (8–68) | 23.2 ± 14.9 (1–48) | P = 0.006 | 40.5 ± 21.9 (5–70) | 28.5 ± 19.8 (3–60) | P = 0.026 | 42.8 ± 21.5 (17–69) | 32.4 ± 20.7 (8–60) | P = 0.031 |
| SPADI total score | 47.9 ± 22.4 (16–90) | 33.0 ± 19.2 (2–60) | p = 0.004 | 57.5 ± 26.3 (14–95) | 39.5 ± 24.6 (9–70) | P = 0.021 | 59.6 ± 27.9 (26–91) | 43.6 ± 23.4 (16–74) | P = 0.027 |
Mean ± standard deviation (minimum–maximum value), *paired t test.
The comparison of functional evaluation between the groups (acromion type 1, type 2 and type 3) before and after ESWT.
| Before ESWT | After ESWT | |
|---|---|---|
| SPADI pain score | P = 0.274* | P = 0.837* |
| SPADI functional score | P = 0.509* | P = 0.567* |
| SPADI total score | P = 0.529* | P = 0.602* |
*One way ANOVA test.