Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması

Year 2017, , 197 - 202, 01.12.2017
https://doi.org/10.5505/kjms.2017.47550

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmada hafif ve orta derecede idiopatik Karpal Tünel Sendromunda (KTS) tanısı almış hastaların kısa ve uzun dönemli kontrolleriyle, kortikostroid enjeksiyonu, fonoforez ve iyontoforez ile kortikosteroidin farklı yollarla verilmesi ve konvansiyonel tedavi
yöntemlerinin etkinliklerini ve birbirlerine olan üstünlüklerinin gösterilmesi amaçlandı.
Materyal ve Metot: Hafif ve orta derecede idiopatik KTS tanısı alan 48 kadın hasta araştırmaya dahil edildi ancak hastaların 24. ay uzun dönem kontrollerinde adres değişikliği, telefon değişikliği vb. sebeplerle 39 hastaya ulaşıldı ve çalışma 39 hastayla bitirildi. Grup I’e (n=13) steroid enjeksiyonu, grup II’ye (n=7) steroid ile fonoforez, grup III’e (n=8) steroid ile iontoforez, grup IV’e (n=11) ise sadece nonsteroid antiinflamatuar ilaç (NSAİİ) reçete edildi. Her dört grupta yer alan hastalara el, elbileğini nötral pozisyonda tutan istirahat ateli verildi. Hastaların semptomları Boston Semptom Ciddiyet Ölçeği (BSCÖ); kavrama güçleri Jamar el dinanometresi; lateral, palmar ve parmak ucu kavrama güçleri pinçmetre, el fonksiyonları Nine Hole Peg Test (NHPT) ile tedavi öncesi, tedaviden 3 ve 24 ay sonra değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Çalışmaya alınan hastalar global olarak değerlendirilerek grip strength (GS), pinch strength (PS), nine hole peg (NHP),
fonksiyonel durum skalası (FDS), Boston semptom ciddiyeti ölçeği (BSCÖ), giriş, 3. ay kontrol ve 24. ay kontrol değerlerinin ortalama ve standart sapmaları hesaplandı. Tüm değerlendirmelerde 1, 2, 3. gruptaki hastaların giriş-3. ay ve giriş-24. ay değerleri arasında anlamlı fark bulundu (p<0,05), fakat kontrol grubunda her iki takipte de anlamlı fark bulunamadı ve kontrollerde gücün, giriş değerinden daha düşük olduğu dikkat çekti (p>0,05). 
Sonuç: KTS tedavisinde yakınmaların ve klinik bulguların hepsinde tedavi öncesi değerlerine göre anlamlı düzelme görüldü ve bu
düzelme 24 ay sonrasında da 3. ay kontrollerine göre azalmakla birlikte devam etti. Sadece NSAİİ ve splint verilen kontrol grubunda
ise klinik ve fonksiyonel parametrelerde düzelme görülmekle birlikte tedavi gruplarının altında bir gelişim saptandı.

References

  • 1. Hadler NM. Nerve entrapment syndromes. In: McCarty DJ, Kopman WJ (Editors). Arthritis and allied conditions. Lea and Febiger: Philadelphia, 1993:1619–1624.
  • 2. Gerritsen AA, de Krom MC, Struijs MA et al. Conservative treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Neurol 2002;249:272–280.
  • 3. Scholten RJ, de Krom MC, Bertelsmann FW et al. Variation in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1997;20:1334–1335.
  • 4. Stevens JC. AAEM Minimonograph #26: The electrodiagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1997;20:1477–1486.
  • 5. Graham RG, Hudson DA, Solomons M et al. A prospective study to assess the outcome of steroid injections and wrist splinting for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2004;113:550–556.
  • 6. Levine D, Simmons B, Koris M et al. A self administered questionnaire for the assesment of severity of symptoms and the funtional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Sur, 1993;75:1585–1592.
  • 7. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Volland G, Kashman N. Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strenght evaluations. J Hand Surg 1984;9:222, 226.
  • 8. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Kashman N, Volland G. Adult norms for the nine hole peg test of finger dexterity. Occup Ther J Res 1985;5:24–38.
  • 9. Oh. SJ. Normal Values for Common Nerve Conduction Tests. In: Oh SJ (Ed). Clinical electromyography, Nerve conduction studies 2nd ed. Baltimore, Maryland: Williams and Wilkins 1993;84–105.
  • 10. Costello CT, Jeske A. Ionthophoresis: Applications in transdermal medication delivery. Phys Ther 1995;75:554–562.
  • 11. Chantraine A, Ludy JP, Berger D. Is cortisone iontophoresis possible? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1986;67:38–40.
  • 12. Dakowicz A, Latosiewicz R. The value of iontophoresis combined with ultrasound in patients with the carpal tunnel syndrome. Rocz Akad Med Bialymst 2005;50:196–198.
  • 13. Gelbermen R, Aranson D, Weisman M. Carpal -Tunnel Syndrome. J. Bone Joint Surg 1980;62:1181–1184.
  • 14. Yağcı D, Uçan H, Yılmaz L ve ark. Karpal Tünel Sendromu Tedavisinde Splint, Splint ile Lokal Steroid Enjeksiyonu ve Cerrahinin Karşılaştırılması Tr Fiz Tıp Rehabil Derg 2006;52:55–60.
  • 15. Burke D, Burke M, Steawart G, Cambre A. Splinting for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: In Search of the optimal angle. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:1241–1244.

Comparison of Corticosteroid Injection, Fonoforesis and Iontoforesis in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Year 2017, , 197 - 202, 01.12.2017
https://doi.org/10.5505/kjms.2017.47550

Abstract

Aim: In this study, our aim is show that in mild degree Idiopatic Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) patients, short and long term controls with corticosteroid injections, phonophoresis and iontophoresis which corticosteroid is given different ways and conventional treatment methods efficiency and superiority of each other.
Material and Method: 48 female patients who have mild degree CTS enrolled to the start of the study but at 24 month control
we reach 39 patients because of telephone number or address change. And we finished the study with 39 patients. In group I
(n=13) we used the steroid injection, in group II (n=7) we used the steroid phonophoresis, in group III (n=8) we used steroid iontophoresis and in group IV we used only NSAID. All of the patients are used the splint which fix up wrist and hand in neutral position. Before the treatment, 3 and 24 month after the treatment patients are evaluated with Boston Symptom Severity Scala (BSSS) for symptoms, Jamar hand dynamometer for grip strength (GS), pinchmeter for lateral palmar and fingertip grip strength (PS), nine hole peg test (NHPT) for hand functions.
Results: All of the patients are globally evaluated with BSSS, GS, PS, NHPT and EMG in the beginning, 3 month and 24 month controls. All of the evaluations in group I, II, III at the beginning are founded significant different (p>0.05) than 3 month and 24 month
control results. But in the control group both of the follow up cannot find significant difference and in controls GS and PS force is
decreased from the beginning.
Conclusion: All of the group that treated for CTS, complains and clinic symptoms are improved and this improvement are continuing
on the 24th month, but slightly decreased than 3 month controls. Only in control group, clinical and functional parameter is improved but lower than other group.

References

  • 1. Hadler NM. Nerve entrapment syndromes. In: McCarty DJ, Kopman WJ (Editors). Arthritis and allied conditions. Lea and Febiger: Philadelphia, 1993:1619–1624.
  • 2. Gerritsen AA, de Krom MC, Struijs MA et al. Conservative treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Neurol 2002;249:272–280.
  • 3. Scholten RJ, de Krom MC, Bertelsmann FW et al. Variation in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1997;20:1334–1335.
  • 4. Stevens JC. AAEM Minimonograph #26: The electrodiagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1997;20:1477–1486.
  • 5. Graham RG, Hudson DA, Solomons M et al. A prospective study to assess the outcome of steroid injections and wrist splinting for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2004;113:550–556.
  • 6. Levine D, Simmons B, Koris M et al. A self administered questionnaire for the assesment of severity of symptoms and the funtional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Sur, 1993;75:1585–1592.
  • 7. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Volland G, Kashman N. Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strenght evaluations. J Hand Surg 1984;9:222, 226.
  • 8. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Kashman N, Volland G. Adult norms for the nine hole peg test of finger dexterity. Occup Ther J Res 1985;5:24–38.
  • 9. Oh. SJ. Normal Values for Common Nerve Conduction Tests. In: Oh SJ (Ed). Clinical electromyography, Nerve conduction studies 2nd ed. Baltimore, Maryland: Williams and Wilkins 1993;84–105.
  • 10. Costello CT, Jeske A. Ionthophoresis: Applications in transdermal medication delivery. Phys Ther 1995;75:554–562.
  • 11. Chantraine A, Ludy JP, Berger D. Is cortisone iontophoresis possible? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1986;67:38–40.
  • 12. Dakowicz A, Latosiewicz R. The value of iontophoresis combined with ultrasound in patients with the carpal tunnel syndrome. Rocz Akad Med Bialymst 2005;50:196–198.
  • 13. Gelbermen R, Aranson D, Weisman M. Carpal -Tunnel Syndrome. J. Bone Joint Surg 1980;62:1181–1184.
  • 14. Yağcı D, Uçan H, Yılmaz L ve ark. Karpal Tünel Sendromu Tedavisinde Splint, Splint ile Lokal Steroid Enjeksiyonu ve Cerrahinin Karşılaştırılması Tr Fiz Tıp Rehabil Derg 2006;52:55–60.
  • 15. Burke D, Burke M, Steawart G, Cambre A. Splinting for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: In Search of the optimal angle. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:1241–1244.
There are 15 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Clinical Sciences
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Kudret Cem Karayol

Ece Ünlü This is me

Aytül Çakıcı This is me

Publication Date December 1, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017

Cite

APA Karayol, K. C., Ünlü, E., & Çakıcı, A. (2017). Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences, 7(3), 197-202. https://doi.org/10.5505/kjms.2017.47550
AMA Karayol KC, Ünlü E, Çakıcı A. Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences. December 2017;7(3):197-202. doi:10.5505/kjms.2017.47550
Chicago Karayol, Kudret Cem, Ece Ünlü, and Aytül Çakıcı. “Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez Ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması”. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences 7, no. 3 (December 2017): 197-202. https://doi.org/10.5505/kjms.2017.47550.
EndNote Karayol KC, Ünlü E, Çakıcı A (December 1, 2017) Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences 7 3 197–202.
IEEE K. C. Karayol, E. Ünlü, and A. Çakıcı, “Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması”, Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 197–202, 2017, doi: 10.5505/kjms.2017.47550.
ISNAD Karayol, Kudret Cem et al. “Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez Ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması”. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences 7/3 (December 2017), 197-202. https://doi.org/10.5505/kjms.2017.47550.
JAMA Karayol KC, Ünlü E, Çakıcı A. Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences. 2017;7:197–202.
MLA Karayol, Kudret Cem et al. “Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez Ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması”. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 7, no. 3, 2017, pp. 197-02, doi:10.5505/kjms.2017.47550.
Vancouver Karayol KC, Ünlü E, Çakıcı A. Karpal Tünel Sendromunda Kortikosteroid Enjeksiyonu, Fonoforez ve İyontoforezin Karşılaştırılması. Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences. 2017;7(3):197-202.