文章摘要
体外冲击波对创伤性膝关节挛缩患者疼痛及功能改善的临床研究
投稿时间:2025-08-25  修订日期:2026-06-11
DOI:
中文关键词: 体外冲击波  膝关节挛缩  疼痛  本体感觉  随机对照研究
英文关键词: Extracorporeal shock wave  Knee contracture  Pain  Proprioception  Randomized controlled trial
基金项目:安徽省卫生健康科研项目(AHWJ2022b063);安徽医科大学第二附属医院国自然孵育计划项目(2022GMFY05);2022年安徽医科大学高峰学科(临床医学)学科建设项目(2022GFXK-EFY08);安徽医科大学2023年学科建设项目(2023lcxkEFY010);安徽省卫生健康科研项目(AHWJ2023A30077);2024年度省级大学生创新创业训练计划项目(S202410366008),国家自然科学基金项目(面上项目,重点项目,重大项目)
作者单位邮编
张大冬 安徽医科大学第二附属医院 230601
周云* 安徽医科大学第二附属医院 
摘要点击次数: 58
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      目的 评估体外冲击波(ESW)配合常规康复治疗创伤性膝关节挛缩的短期疗效。方法 采用前瞻性随机对照试验设计,由不参与治疗的研究人员使用随机数字表法将2023年12月至2025年1月期间安徽医科大学第二附属医院康复医学科收治的48例创伤性膝关节挛缩患者分为常规康复组和体外冲击波组,每组24例。常规康复组接受关节松动、牵伸、肌力训练等常规康复治疗,体外冲击波组在常规康复治疗基础上增加体外冲击波治疗,每周2次,两组疗程均为2周。疗程结束后,观察两组患者在以下指标上的差异:主要结局指标为膝关节的主动屈膝角度、VAS评分;次要结局指标为屈伸肌峰力矩(PT)、H/Q比值、本体感觉偏差及Lysholm膝关节功能评分。结果 治疗前,两组患者膝关节主动屈膝角度、VAS评分、屈伸肌峰力矩(PT)、H/Q比值、本体感觉偏差及Lysholm膝关节功能评分,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。治疗2周后,两组患者各项指标均较本组治疗前有改善(P<0.001)。体外冲击波组治疗后的主动屈膝角度优于同期常规康复组(P<0.05),且治疗前后差值大于常规康复组(P<0.05);体外冲击波组治疗后的VAS评分较常规康复组显著下降(P<0.05);体外冲击波组治疗后的屈伸肌PT、H/Q比值、膝关节30°和45°位置觉偏差及Lysholm评分均优于常规康复组(P<0.05)。未见严重不良事件,仅1例出现轻度皮下瘀斑。结论 在常规康复基础上加用ESW可在2周内进一步减轻疼痛并改善功能,提示ESW可能是创伤性膝关节挛缩的有效辅助治疗方法。
英文摘要:
      Objective To evaluate the short-term efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave (ESW) combined with conventional rehabilitation in treating traumatic knee contracture. Methods This study used a prospective randomized controlled trial design. Researchers not involved in the treatment used a random number table to assign 48 patients with traumatic knee joint contracture admitted to the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University from December 2023 to January 2025 into the conventional rehabilitation group and the extracorporeal shock wave group, with 24 patients in each group. The conventional rehabilitation group received standard rehabilitation treatments such as joint mobilization, stretching, and muscle strength training, while the extracorporeal shock wave group received extracorporeal shock wave therapy in addition to conventional rehabilitation, twice a week, for a 2-week treatment course in both groups. After the treatment course, the differences between the two groups were observed for the following indicators: primary outcomes were active knee flexion angle and VAS score; secondary outcomes were peak torque (PT) of flexor and extensor muscles, H/Q ratio, proprioceptive deviation, and Lysholm knee function score. Results Before treatment, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in active knee flexion angle, VAS score, flexor and extensor muscle PT, H/Q ratio, proprioceptive deviation, or Lysholm knee function score (P > 0.05). After 2 weeks of treatment, all indicators in both groups improved compared to before treatment (P < 0.001). The active knee flexion angle after treatment in the extracorporeal shock wave group was better than that of the conventional rehabilitation group at the same time (P < 0.05), and the difference before and after treatment was greater than in the conventional rehabilitation group (P < 0.05); the VAS score after treatment in the extracorporeal shock wave group was significantly lower than that in the conventional rehabilitation group (P < 0.05); the flexor and extensor muscle PT, H/Q ratio, proprioceptive deviation at knee positions of 30° and 45°, and Lysholm score after treatment in the extracorporeal shock wave group were all superior to the conventional rehabilitation group (P < 0.05). No serious adverse events were observed, with only one case of mild subcutaneous ecchymosis. Conclusion Adding ESW to conventional rehabilitation can further reduce pain and improve function within 2 weeks, suggesting that ESW may be an effective adjuvant therapy for traumatic knee contracture. However, given the small sample size and short follow-up period, larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm its efficacy.
View Fulltext   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭