• PM R · Jan 2020

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Effectiveness of Phonophoresis Treatment in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Randomized Double-blind, Controlled Trial.

    • Jariya Boonhong and Worakan Thienkul.
    • Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
    • PM R. 2020 Jan 1; 12 (1): 8-15.

    ObjectiveTo determine the effects of phonophoresis of piroxicam (PH-P) and phonophoresis of dexamethasone sodium phosphate (PH-Dex) on mild to moderate carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and to compare each of them with the control group of nondrug ultrasound (US) therapy.DesignA randomized, double-blind controlled trial.SettingDepartment of rehabilitation medicine, university hospital.ParticipantsPatients with clinical signs and symptoms of CTS underwent an electrophysiological study to confirm the diagnosis of CTS and severity grading. Thirty-three patients, 50 hands (52% of the patients had bilateral CTS, n = 17) with mild to moderate CTS were randomly allocated into three study groups: PH-P, PH-Dex, or US.InterventionAll three groups received 10 sessions of 1-MHz frequency, 1.0 w/cm2 intensity ultrasound wave with stroking technique, continuous mode, at the palm side of the hand over the carpal tunnel area-10 minutes per session, two to three times per week for 4 weeks, for a total of 10 sessions. During each session, the patients received 15 cm3 of study gel according to the study groups. The PH-P group received 0.5% piroxicam gel mixture (equivalence of 20 mg of piroxicam). The PH-Dex group received 0.4% dexamethasone sodium phosphate gel mixture (equivalence 60 mg of dexamethasone). The US group received nondrug gel.Main Outcome MeasurementsBoston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire for symptom severity (BCTQ SYMPT), Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire for functional status (BCTQ FUNCT) and electrophysiological parameters of the median nerve including distal sensory latency (DSL) and distal motor latency (DML) were evaluated before the first treatment and after the last treatment.ResultsAfter treatment, all treatment groups (PH-P, PH-Dex, and US) showed significant improvements of the BCTQ SYMPT (P < .001, -0.74 ± 0.73 [-1.12, -0.37], -0.91 ± 0.96 [-1.41, -0.42], and - 0.68 ± 0.71 [-1.05, -0.30], respectively) and the BCTQ FUNCT (P < .001, -0.68 ± 0.89 [-1.14, -0.22], -0.74 ± 0.84 [-1.17, -0.30], and - 0.80 ± 0.80 [-1.22, -0.37], respectively). For the BCTQ SYMPT, only the PH-Dex showed an improvement score above MCID at 0.8 level [-0.91 ± 0.96]. The improvement of BCTQ FUNCT score of all groups was above Minimal Clincally Important Difference (MCID) at 0.5 level (-0.68 ± 0.89, -0.74 ± 0.84 and - 0.80 ± 0.80, respectively).The DSL was decreased in all groups but the changes were not statistically significant (P = .70, -0.11 ± 0.34 [-0.28, 0.06], -0.09 ± 0.32 [-0.26, 0.07], and - 0.14 ± 0.29 [-0.29, 0.02], respectively). The DML showed decrease only in PH-DEX and the US group but it was not statistically significant (P = .68, 0.05 ± 0.44 [-0.17, 0.27], -0.09 ± 0.51[-0.34, 0.17], and - 0.27 ± 0.49 [-0.53, 0.01], respectively). All measured outcomes were not statistically different in between-group-comparison of BCTQ SYMPT, BCTQ FUNCT, DSL, and DML (P = .58, P = .79, P = .20 and P = .39, respectively). However, there was a clinically significant difference of the improvement of BCTQ SYMPT in between-group comparison; only the PH-DEX was above the MCID level, while the PH-P and US were not.ConclusionsNeither nondrug US nor phonophoresis treatments (PH-P and PH-Dex) were effective to improve the DSL and DML in mild to moderate CTS. All three groups showed significant improvements in clinical symptoms (BCTQ SYMPT) and functional status (BCTQ FUNCT). At 1 MHz frequency and 1.0 w/cm2 intensity of ultrasound wave, there is no statistically significant difference between phonophoresis and the nondrug US.Level Of EvidenceI.© 2019 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.