RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pathologic scarring is a common problem after burn injury that has functional and esthetic limitations. Conservative and surgical treatments available for these scars are not always satisfactory. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is a noninvasive modality that has proven positive effects on burn scars and wound healing in few studies. This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of ESWT on improving burn scar in extremities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a prospective quasi-experimental on burn patients with burn scar in their extremities that underwent ESWT sessions once a week for 6 weeks. For evaluating pain and itching, visual analog scale (VAS) and for scar appearance, Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) were used. These scales were measured and compared at the beginning of the treatment, at the end of the treatment, and 1 and 3 months after the end of the intervention. RESULTS: In this study, 17 patients were treated with ESWT with a mean age of 37.94 ± 7.25 years that 47.1% of them were male. The mean of VAS score for pain and itching and VSS score were decreased significantly after the treatment and during follow-ups (All P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ESWT can improve the pain, itching, and appearance of the burn scar in human extremities in burn patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic recalcitrant plantar fasciitis is a disabling condition. We presumed if shock wave could increase the permeability of skin and facilitate penetration of topical corticosteroid through the skin; the combinational therapeutic effect would be stronger than using shock wave alone. The study purpose was to utilize the synergistic effect of shock wave and topical corticosteroid in treatment of plantar fasciitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in both groups (n = 40) received four sessions of shock wave with the same protocol at weekly intervals. At 30 min before each session, we used an occlusive dressing of topical clobetasol for the intervention group and Vaseline oil for the control group. Pain severity was assessed with visual analog scale (VAS) and modified Roles and Maudsley score (RMS) at baseline and 1 month and 3 months after intervention. Plantar fascia (PF) thickness was measured with ultrasonography at baseline and 3 months after intervention. RESULTS: One month after intervention, VAS morning showed significant improvement in intervention group (P = 0.006) and RMS showed better improvement in intervention group (P = 0.026). There was no significant difference between the two groups after 3 months in RMS or VAS score. PF thickness was decreased significantly in both groups, but it was not significant between the two groups (P = 0.292). CONCLUSIONS: This combinational therapy yielded earlier pain reduction and functional improvement than using shock wave alone; topical corticosteroid could enhance the effectiveness of shockwave in short-term in the treatment of recalcitrant plantar fasciitis.