Is Suprascapular Nerve Block Better Than Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injection for the Treatment of Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder? A Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Adhesive Capsulitis of shoulder (AdCS) is a treatment dilemma for surgeons. Intraarticular Corticosteroid Injection (IACI) has shown only short-term benefit in improving shoulder-related disability. Suprascapular nerve block (SSNB) has shown promise in trials in reducing chronic shoulder pain. Thus a RCT was conducted to compare the efficacy of SSNB versus IACI in the treatment of AdCS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 86 patients with AdCS were divided into SSNB and IACI groups by block randomization. SSNB group received single Suprascapular Nerve Block with 10ml of 0.5% Bupivacaine while IACI group received single injection of 40mg Triamcinolone and 1ml 2% Lignocaine in the shoulder; both followed by physiotherapy and followed-up and evaluated with SPADI and modified Constant scores at 1, 6 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements occurred in both groups. At 12 weeks, the SPADI and Con-stant score for SSNB improved to 9.62±10.07 and 36.95±3.43 respectively (p<0.001); and for IACI improved to 11.65±5.56 and 35.07±3.32 respectively (p <0.001). The difference in the scores between the 2 groups at 1st and 6th week was insignificant, but was statistically significant in favour of SSNB at 12 weeks (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: 1. Thus, from the present study it can be concluded that both Suprascapular Nerve Block and Intra-articular Corticosteroid injection are effective mo-dalities of treatment for Adhesive Capsulitis of the shoulder. 2. Suprascapular Nerve Block increased patients' pain tolerability for effective mobilization, the effect be-ing persistent even at 12 weeks following injection. 3. It was safer than Intra-articular Corticosteroid in-jection with less incidence of adverse effects in our study and the literature. 4. It is an easy-to-perform outpatient procedure, with minimal chance of infection and other complications. 5. In light of the above, we may recommend Su-prascapular Nerve Block as the initial procedure of choice in patients with Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder.

Forecasting Posttreatment Outcome of Hallux Valgus Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite advancements in operative techniques and the extraordinary number of procedures described for correcting hallux valgus (HV), there is still uncertainty as to why some patients thrive postoperatively whereas others do not. This study aimed to investigate whether the postoperative outcome of HV surgery could be predicted from patient demographics or functional impairment at the time of referral. METHODS: The prospectively collected data, from 92 patients, were analyzed to determine whether patient demographics significantly influenced outcome 52 weeks after surgery. Potential relationships between socioeconomic deprivation and the outcome, as well as between preoperative functional impairment and postoperative improvement, were examined. The Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) and Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) were used in this evaluation. RESULTS: None of the demographics studied were found to be statistically significant determinants of outcome. Preoperative MOXFQ scores for patients from the most deprived areas were significantly worse at the time of referral. Patients living in the least deprived postcodes experienced the lowest improvement in MOXFQ scores. Patients from the most deprived SIMD quintile achieved significantly higher improvement in MOXFQ-walking and standing compared to those from the least deprived quintile. A strong positive correlation was found between the preoperative MOXFQ scores and the improvement in the scores postoperatively. CONCLUSION: In this patient cohort, demographics could not be used to predict the postoperative outcome at week 52. Socioeconomic disparities seem to influence the timing of patients seeking surgery. Lower preoperative MOXFQ scores strongly correlate with a lesser degree of postoperative improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective study with prospective arm.