霍修林, 杨静, 张璇, 王博, 龚洁, 袁维秀, 米卫东. 超声介入和体外冲击波治疗足底筋膜炎的疗效观察[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2018, 39(1): 51-53,61. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.01.014
引用本文: 霍修林, 杨静, 张璇, 王博, 龚洁, 袁维秀, 米卫东. 超声介入和体外冲击波治疗足底筋膜炎的疗效观察[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2018, 39(1): 51-53,61. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.01.014
HUO Xiulin, YANG Jing, ZHANG Xuan, WANG Bo, GONG Jie, YUAN Weixiu, MI Weidong. Ultrasound interventional therapy versus extracorporeal shock wave in treatment of plantar fasciitis[J]. ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF CHINESE PLA MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2018, 39(1): 51-53,61. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.01.014
Citation: HUO Xiulin, YANG Jing, ZHANG Xuan, WANG Bo, GONG Jie, YUAN Weixiu, MI Weidong. Ultrasound interventional therapy versus extracorporeal shock wave in treatment of plantar fasciitis[J]. ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF CHINESE PLA MEDICAL SCHOOL, 2018, 39(1): 51-53,61. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-5227.2018.01.014

超声介入和体外冲击波治疗足底筋膜炎的疗效观察

Ultrasound interventional therapy versus extracorporeal shock wave in treatment of plantar fasciitis

  • 摘要: 目的 观察超声引导下类固醇类激素注射和放散性体外冲击波治疗足底筋膜炎的疗效。 方法 将2016年1 - 10月就诊于本院疼痛科的100例足底筋膜炎患者随机分为超声介入组(A组,n=50)和冲击波组(B组,n=50)。比较患者治疗前(T0)和治疗后1 d (T1)、1个月(T2)、3个月(T3)早晨起步状态下的视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS);同时比较治疗后3个月时超声下足底筋膜的厚度。 结果 两组治疗后早晨起步状态下VAS评分均较治疗前降低(A:7.05±1.13 vs 3.43±1.58;B:6.98±1.22 vs 4.55±1.23,P均< 0.05);治疗后1 d (T1)、1个月(T2)超声介入组早晨起步状态下VAS评分均低于冲击波组(3.43±1.58 vs 4.55±1.23,1.08±2.19 vs 2.86±1.70,P均< 0.05),治疗后3个月(T3)超声介入组早晨起步状态下VAS评分高于冲击波组(P=0.045);两组患者治疗后足底筋膜厚度与治疗前相比均变薄(P均< 0.05),并且治疗后3个月冲击波组足底筋膜厚度较超声介入组薄(P=0.007)。 结论 超声引导下类固醇类激素注射和放散性冲击波短期内治疗足底筋膜炎均有效。超声介入组较冲击波组显效快,但冲击波组疗效相对持久可靠。

     

    Abstract: Objective To observe the efficacy of ultrasound interventional therapy versus extracorporeal shock wave (ESW) in the treatment of plantar fasciitis. Methods Clinical data about 100 patients with plantar fasciitis admitted to department of pain treatment in Chinese PLA General Hospital from January to October in 2016 were collected. All patients were randomly divided into two groups: ultrasound - guided drug injection group (group A, n=50) and ESW treatment group (group B, n=50). The therapeutic parameters, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of the first step pain in the morning, were monitored at before treatment and at 1 day, 1 month and 3 months after treatment, respectively. The thickness of the plantar fascia was compared at 3 months after treatment. Results The VAS scores of the first step pain in the morning decreased significantly compared with those before treatment in two groups (A: 7.05±1.13 vs 3.43±1.58; B: 6.98±1.22 vs 4.55±1.23; P< 0.05, respectively). The VAS scores of the first step pain in the morning in the ultrasound intervention group were significantly lower than those in ESW group at 1 day, 1 month after treatment(3.43±1.58 vs 4.55±1.23; 1.08±2.19 vs 2.86±1.70; P< 0.05, respectively), whereas it was higher in ultrasound intervention group compared with ESW group at 3 months after treatment (2.08±2.61 vs 1.10±1.66, P=0.045). The thickness of the posterior plantar fascia of the two groups decreased significantly when compared with that before treatment (All P< 0.05), and the thickness of the plantar fascia of the ESW group was less than that of the ultrasound intervention group at 3 months after treatment (4.34±0.39 vs 4.06±0.53, P=0.007). Conclusion Both ultrasound interventional therapy and ESW are effective for plantar fasciitis. Ultrasound interventional therapy is superior to ESW in respect to short term effect, but ESW exhibits a longer-lasting effect.

     

/

返回文章
返回