Three Sessions of Radial Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy Gives No Additional Benefit Over "Minimal-Dose" Radial Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Patients With Chronic Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the outcomes following 3 weekly sessions of radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy (rESWT) in patients with chronic greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) presenting to an NHS Sports Medicine Clinic in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: Double-blinded randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A single NHS Sports Medicine Clinic, in the United Kingdom. PATIENTS: One hundred twenty patients in an NHS Sports Medicine clinic presenting with symptoms of GTPS who had failed to improve with a minimum of 3 months of rehabilitation were enrolled in the study and randomized equally to the intervention and treatment groups. Mean age was 60.6 ± 11.5 years; 82% were female, and the mean duration of symptoms was 45.4 ± 33.4 months (range, 6 months to 30 years). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive either 3 sessions of ESWT at either the "recommended"/"maximally comfortably tolerated" dose or at "minimal dose." All patients received a structured home exercise program involving flexibility, strength, and balance exercises. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Follow-up was at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Outcome measures included local hip pain, validated hip PROMs (Oxford hip score, non-arthritic hip score, Victorian Institute of Sport assessment questionnaire), and wider measures of function including sleep (Pittsburgh sleep quality index) and mood (hospital anxiety and depression scale). RESULTS: Results were available for 98% of patients at the 6-month period. There were statistically significant within-group improvements in pain, local function, and sleep seen in both groups. However, fewer benefits were seen in other outcome measures, including activity or mood. CONCLUSION: There were no time × group interaction effects seen between the groups at any time point, indicating that in the 3 sessions, the "recommended-dose" rESWT had no measurable benefit compared with "minimal dose" rESWT in this group of patients with GTPS. The underlying reason remains unclear; it may be that rESWT is ineffective in the treatment of patients with chronic GTPS, that "minimal dose" rESWT is sufficient for a therapeutic effect, or that a greater number of treatment sessions are required for maximal benefit. These issues need to be considered in further research.

The Stanford Hall consensus statement for post-COVID-19 rehabilitation.

The highly infectious and pathogenic novel coronavirus (CoV), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2, has emerged causing a global pandemic. Although COVID-19 predominantly affects the respiratory system, evidence indicates a multisystem disease which is frequently severe and often results in death. Long-term sequelae of COVID-19 are unknown, but evidence from previous CoV outbreaks demonstrates impaired pulmonary and physical function, reduced quality of life and emotional distress. Many COVID-19 survivors who require critical care may develop psychological, physical and cognitive impairments. There is a clear need for guidance on the rehabilitation of COVID-19 survivors. This consensus statement was developed by an expert panel in the fields of rehabilitation, sport and exercise medicine (SEM), rheumatology, psychiatry, general practice, psychology and specialist pain, working at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre, Stanford Hall, UK. Seven teams appraised evidence for the following domains relating to COVID-19 rehabilitation requirements: pulmonary, cardiac, SEM, psychological, musculoskeletal, neurorehabilitation and general medical. A chair combined recommendations generated within teams. A writing committee prepared the consensus statement in accordance with the appraisal of guidelines research and evaluation criteria, grading all recommendations with levels of evidence. Authors scored their level of agreement with each recommendation on a scale of 0-10. Substantial agreement (range 7.5-10) was reached for 36 recommendations following a chaired agreement meeting that was attended by all authors. This consensus statement provides an overarching framework assimilating evidence and likely requirements of multidisciplinary rehabilitation post COVID-19 illness, for a target population of active individuals, including military personnel and athletes.

High-Volume Image-Guided Injections in Achilles and Patellar Tendinopathy in a Young Active Military Population: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Chronic Achilles and patellar tendinopathy are a significant burden in physically active populations. High-volume image-guided injection (HVIGI) proposes to strip away associated neovascularity, disrupt painful nerve ingrowth, and facilitate rehabilitation. Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of HVIGI with and without steroid relative to placebo. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 62 participants were recruited between May 25, 2016, and March 5, 2020. Participants were men aged 18 to 55 years with Achilles or patellar tendinopathy of at least 6-month chronicity that had not improved with nonoperative management (including physical therapy and shockwave therapy), with ultrasound evidence of neovascularization, tendon thickening, and echogenic changes. They were assigned to the following groups: control (3 mL of subcutaneous 0.5% bupivacaine), HVIGI (10 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine and 30 mL of normal saline, ultrasound-guided between tendon and underlying fat pad), or HVIGI with steroid (HVIGIwSteroid; 0.25 mL of 100 mg/mL hydrocortisone). Clinicians and assessors were blinded. All participants were supervised through a pain-guided progressive loading program for 6 months postinjection. The main outcome measures were the Victoria Institute of Sport Assessments (VISA) for Achilles and patellar tendinopathy and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain at 6 months postinjection. Results: The VISA score improved by a mean of 22.8 points (95% CI, 10.4-35.3 points; effect size [ES], 1.51) in the control group (n = 21), 18.6 points (95% CI, 9.1-28.0 points; ES, 1.31) in the HVIGI group (n = 21), and 18.5 points (95% CI, 3.4-33.6 points; ES, 0.88) in the HVIGIwSteroid group (n = 20). VAS pain improved by a mean of 15 points (interquartile range [IQR], -38.75, 8 points; ES, 0.39) in controls, 13 points (IQR,-34.0, 3.75 points; ES, 0.47) in the HVIGI group, and 27 points (IQR,-38.0, -1.0 points; ES, 0.54) in the HVIGIwSteroid group. The main effects were significant for time (P < .001) but not group (P ≥ .48), with no group × time interaction (P = .71). One participant was lost to follow-up from each group, multiple imputation was used for missing data points. No adverse events occurred. Conclusion: Study findings did not demonstrate superiority of HVIGI over control injection. Registration: EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT: 2015-003587-36).