Objectives: Recently, high-intensity laser therapy has been used in the therapeutic protocols for pain management. We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of high-intensity laser therapy versus other different modalities for improving lateral epicondylitis symptoms. Methodology: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on prospective randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct until June 2021 using relevant key words. We analyzed the data using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4). Results: Six randomized controlled trials with 344 patients were included. There is low-quality evidence that high-intensity laser therapy generates a small reduction on pain intensity compared with a control group either during activity (mean difference = −0.98, 95% confidence interval = −1.6 to −0.35, P = 0.002) or during rest (mean difference = −0.98, 95% confidence interval = −1.68 to −0.09, P = 0.03). In addition, there is low-quality evidence that high-intensity laser therapy provides small improvements in quality of life (physical component) compared with control (mean difference = 9.76, 95% confidence interval = 2.69 to 16.83, P < 0.0001). Conclusions: High-intensity laser therapy is an effective therapeutic modality to reduce pain and improve quality of life (36-item short form health survey physical component) in patients experiencing persistent symptoms of lateral epicondylitis. However, grip strength, hand function, and quality of life (36-item short form health survey) did not show significant differences between high-intensity laser therapy and other therapies.
In Egypt, Rhizoctonia solani is an economically important fungal pathogen on many crops such as common bean causing serious yield losses. Biofumigation with Indian mustard (Brassica juncea), as a potential alternative to the restricted fumigant methyl bromide, is gaining attention in sustainable vegetable production. In this study, laboratory and greenhouse experiments were conducted to evaluate the biofumigation effect of B. juncea, used as dry plants, seed meal, seed powder, methanol extract, and fresh plants (at the vegetative and flowering stages), against R. solani. Results showed that hexane defatted seed meal was the most efficient one, followed by the seed powder, fresh plants at the flowering stage then fresh plants at the vegetative stage. The fungal inhibition rate was 61.5, 50.2, 49.9, and 47.7%, respectively. While the dry plants at both flowering and vegetative stage recorded the lowest suppressive effect (44.3 and 39.1%, respectively). The findings open up the possibility of using the B. juncea in managing the root rot fungus, not only as a common green manure but also as a defatted seed meal.
Background Corticosteroid (CS) can be injected in a blind fashion (landmark-guided) or with ultrasound (US) guidance, and this may contribute to varying clinical results. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of US-guided versus landmark CS injections in the treatment of adult patients with shoulder pain. Methods We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing US-guided versus landmark CS injection regarding visual analogue scale (VAS), functional scores, disability scores, abduction degree, and side effects. The data were pooled as mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), or risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using R software (meta package 4.9-0) for windows. Subgroup analysis and leave-one-out analysis were conducted. Results Eighteen RCTs, with a total of 1010 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled estimate favored the US-guided over landmark CS injection in terms of the mean change of VAS between 6 weeks and baseline (SMD = − 0.48, 95% CI [− 0.79, − 0.17]), the shoulder functional scores (SMD = 0.35, 95% CI [0.05, 0.65]) and shoulder abduction degree (MD = 8.78, 95% CI [3.11, 14.46]). Whilst no significant difference was found between the compared group regarding the overall shoulder disability scores (SMD = − 0.51, 95% CI (− 1.25, 0.22]) and side effects (RR = 0.45, 95% CI [0.15, 1.34]). None of the eligible study analyzed the cost-effectiveness of the US-guided method compared with the landmark method for CS injection. Conclusion Our analysis showed that US-guided CS injection was effective in the treatment of various shoulder diseases. Further research on the cost-effectiveness of US-guided CS methods is needed.
Study aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) for frozen shoulder in perimenopausal diabetic women. Materials and methods: A single blind randomized controlled trial was conducted on sixty-two perimenopausal women diagnosed with diabetic frozen shoulder. They were divided randomly into two groups. Group (A) received physiotherapy program in the form of maitland joint mobilization for shoulder joint, self-stretching exercises, range of motion exercises (ROM) and strengthening exercises. Sessions were held 3 times per week, for 4 weeks. Group (B) study group: received the same physiotherapy program in addition to ESWT, once per week, for 4 weeks. Visual analogue scale was used to measure pain intensity, shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) was used to evaluate disability level, while an electrogoniometer was used to measure shoulder flexion, abduction and external rotation range of motion. All measurements were recorded pretreatment and posttreatment program. Results: For intragroup comparison, significant improvement in all treatment outcomes was noted in both groups (P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were found between both groups regarding all outcome measures in case of intergroup comparison in the study (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The use of ESWT have a positive effect in reducing pain and improving shoulder range of motion in perimenopausal women suffering from frozen.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.