Erratum to “The Short-term Efficacy of Laser, Brace, and Ultrasound Treatment in Lateral Epicondylitis: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial” [Vol 21, no 1, pp 63–68]

Background: Centrally mediated abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS) is characterized by continuous or frequently recurring abdominal pain and can result in functional loss across several life domains. The efficacy of the present management methods has not been established yet. We performed a prospective randomized controlled trial to explore the short-term efficacy of local analgesic (lidocaine) and opioid analgesic (sufentanil) in patients with CAPS. Methods: We consecutively enrolled 130 patients who met the Rome IV CAPS criteria and divided them into the sufentanil + lidocaine (S + L) group and sufentanil (S) group. Patients completed the pain rating scales, including the numeric rating scale (NRS) and verbal rating scale (VRS), 60 min before colonoscopy. All the patients were initially administered sufentanil. In the S + L group, we sprayed a 5 ml solution of lidocaine on the surface of ascending, transverse, descending, and sigmoid colon during colonoscope withdrawal, while 5 ml saline was sprayed in the S group. Follow up was performed 1 day, 3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after colonoscopy, to complete the pain scaling. Results: A comparison of the NRS and VRS showed that there were no significant differences between the S + L and S groups and within each group ( p > 0.05). Conclusions: Local analgesic lidocaine and opioid analgesic sufentanil showed negative efficacy during short-term observation. The opioid receptor blocker sufentanil did not worsen symptoms in patients with CAPS after colonoscopy under general anesthesia in the short term. [chictr.org.cn, Chinese Clinical Trial Identifier, ChiCTR-IOR-16008187]

Download Full-text

Short-term efficacy of a computer-tailored physical activity intervention for prostate and colorectal cancer patients and survivors: a randomized controlled trial

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity ◽

10.1186/s12966-018-0734-9 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 23

Author(s):

Rianne Henrica Johanna Golsteijn ◽

Catherine Bolman ◽

Esmee Volders ◽

Denise Astrid Peels ◽

Hein de Vries ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Physical Activity Intervention ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Short Term ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Term Efficacy ◽

Colorectal Cancer Patients

Download Full-text

Open release versus radiofrequency microtenotomy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Shoulder & Elbow ◽

10.1177/1758573217715255 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 45-51 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Katharine Hamlin ◽

Christopher Munro ◽

Scott L. Barker ◽

Sean McKenna ◽

Kapil Kumar

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Grip Strength ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Numerical Rating Scale ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Lateral Epicondylitis ◽

Open Release ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Significant Difference

Background Optimal surgical treatment of lateral epicondylitis remains uncertain. Recently, radiofrequency microtenotomy (RFMT) has been proposed as a suitable treatment. We compared RFMT with standard open release (OR) in this prospective randomized controlled trial. Methods In total, 41 patients with symptoms for at least 6 months were randomized into two groups: 23 patients had RFMT and 18 had OR. Two patients from RFMT withdrew. Each patient underwent Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain score, grip strength and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores pre-operatively and at 6 weeks. Pain and DASH scores were repeated at 6 months and 12 months. Results NRS pain scores improved by 4.8 points for RFMT and by 3.9 points for OR. There was a significant improvement in both groups from pre-operative scores, although there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at 1 year. Grip strength improved by 31% in the RFMT group compared to 38% in OR. There was no significant difference between the initial and 6 weeks scores or between treatments. At 1 year, DASH was 39.8 points for RFMT and 24.4 points for OR. There was a significant improvement in both groups from pre-operative scores, although there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at 1 year. Conclusions Both groups showed significant improvements and similar benefit to the patient. The results of the present study do not show any benefit of RFMT over the standard OR. As a result of the extra expense of RFMT, we therefore recommend that OR is offered as the standard surgical management.

Download Full-text