两种体外冲击波在治疗肩周炎方面的对照研究

目的　比较电磁式及液电式冲击波治疗肩周炎的疗效情况，以求为肩周炎的治疗寻找一种安全、有效且患者依从性高的治疗方案。方法　选取于2016年6月至2020年6月在广州市第一人民医院康复科门诊或者住院接受肩周炎相关治疗的患者88例（女性患者49例、男性患者39例，年龄45～75岁），简单随机均分成采用电磁式冲击波源（研究组）及液电式冲击波源（对照组）进行治疗，每周治疗1次，共3次，并均辅予常规功能康复。评定并记录治疗前及治疗1、2、3周后的疼痛及肩关节活动度评分。计量资料组内治疗前后差异采用单因素方差分析进行比较，组间采用独立样本t检验进行比较，计数资料采用χ²检验。结果　两组患者年龄、性别、体质量、心率的差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。研究组患者在治疗前及治疗3周后的疼痛和肩关节活动度评分分别为（2.11±0.25）分、（0.89±0.43）分和（2.54±1.02）分、（1.02±0.87）分，差异均有统计学意义（P=0.003、0.007）。对照组患者在治疗前及治疗3周后的疼痛和肩关节活动度评分分别为（2.03±0.29）分、（0.90±0.35）分和（2.55±1.15）分、（1.01±0.79）分，差异均有统计学意义（P=0.001、0.014）。研究组和对照组组间在治疗过程中的3个时间点（治疗1、2、3周后），其组间的疼痛评分和肩关节活动度评分差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。结论　电磁式和液电式冲击波在治疗肩周炎方面有相同的安全性及有效性，但电磁式冲击波的磁场及能量输出稳定且不产生电火花及噪声，因此更值得临床推广。

Comparative study of two kinds of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of scapulohumeral periarthritis

Objective　By comparing the efficacies of electromagnetic and electro-hydraulic shock waves in the treatment of scapulohumeral periarthritis, in order to find a safe, effective, and highly compliant treatment scheme for the treatment of scapulohumeral periarthritis. Methods　A total of 88 patients (49 female patients and 39 male patients, aged 45 to 75 years) who received scapulohumeral periarthritis related treatment in the outpatient or inpatient department of rehabilitation medicine of Guangzhou First People's Hospital from June 2016 to June 2020 were simply randomly divided into an electromagnetic shock wave source group (research group) and an electro-hydraulic shock wave source group (control group), once a week, a total of 3 times, supplemented by routine functional rehabilitation. Pain and motion of shoulder were assessed and recorded before treatment and 1, 2, and 3 weeks after treatment. The measurement data were compared by one-way ANOVA before and after treatment, independent sample t test was used for comparison between groups, and the count data were tested by χ² test. Results　There were no statistically significant differences in the age, gender, body weight, or heart rate between the two groups (all P>0.05). In the research group, the scores of pain and motion of shoulder were (2.11±0.25) points and (2.54±1.02) points before treatment and (0.89±0.43) points and (1.02±0.87) points 3 weeks after treatment, respectively, with statistically significant differences (P=0.003, 0.007). In the control group, the scores of pain and motion of shoulder were (2.03±0.29) points and (2.55±1.15) points before treatment and (0.90±0.35) points and (1.01±0.79) points 3 weeks after treatment, respectively, with statistically significant differences (P=0.001, 0.014). After 1, 2, and 3 weeks of treatment, there were no statistically significant differences in the scores of pain and motion of shoulder between the research group and the control group (all P>0.05). Conclusions　Electromagnetic shock wave and electro-hydraulic shock wave have the same safety and effectiveness in the treatment of scapulohumeral periarthritis, but the magnetic field and energy output of electromagnetic shock wave are stable and does not produce electric spark or noise, so it is more worthy of clinical promotion.