Publication:
The short-term effectiveness of low-level laser, phonophoresis, and iontophoresis in patients with lateral epicondylosis.

dc.contributor.authorBaktir, Seda
dc.contributor.authorRazak Ozdincler, Arzu
dc.contributor.authorKaya Mutlu, Ebru
dc.contributor.authorBilsel, Kerem
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-16T16:00:31Z
dc.date.available2023-05-16T16:00:31Z
dc.description.abstractRandomized parallel group trial.
dc.description.abstractVarious treatment options for lateral epicondylosis have been reported in the literature.
dc.description.abstractWe aimed to compare the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT), phonophoresis, and iontophoresis in terms of pain, function, and grip strength.
dc.description.abstractThis study that comprised 37 patients with lateral epicondylosis was planned as a prospective randomized parallel group trial. Twelve participants were randomized to the LLLT group, 12 to the phonophoresis group, and 13 to the iontophoresis group. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS), pressure algometer, the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation, and grip strength dynamometer were used to measure outcomes. The measurements were performed at baseline and at the end of 15 sessions.
dc.description.abstractInvestigation of the pain scores revealed that all VAS scores were improved in both the laser and iontophoresis groups (VAS at rest: P = .015, effect size (ES) = 1.49 and P = .016, ES = 0.58, respectively; VAS during activity: P = .008, ES = 1.05 and P = .008, ES = 1.16, respectively; VAS at night: P = .013, ES = 1.01 and P = .016, ES = 0.72, respectively). Only advance in function and grip strength was associated with the iontophoresis group (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation P = .006, ES = 0.78; grip strength with elbow extension P = .011, ES = 1.03; with elbow flexion P = .003, ES = 0.52).
dc.description.abstractThe most effective approach could not be highlighted among the existing studies in the literature as they were applied in combination with other therapies.
dc.description.abstractIn our study, we observed that LLLT provides a benefit only for pain, whereas iontophoresis is beneficial for both pain and function. If the effect size is evaluated, LLLT is more influential than iontophoresis for decreasing pain. However, when we compared phonophoresis and iontophoresis in terms of effectiveness, we found that iontophoresis has better effects for pain, function, and grip strength.
dc.identifier.pubmed29452929
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12645/38069
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectIontophoresis
dc.subjectLaser
dc.subjectLateral epicondylosis
dc.subjectPhonophoresis
dc.subjectTennis elbow
dc.subjectUltrasound
dc.titleThe short-term effectiveness of low-level laser, phonophoresis, and iontophoresis in patients with lateral epicondylosis.
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.indexed.atPubMed

Files