Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSwaroop, S
dc.contributor.authorGupta, P
dc.contributor.authorPatnaik, S
dc.contributor.authorReddy, S S
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-26T09:35:12Z
dc.date.available2024-09-26T09:35:12Z
dc.date.issued2023-03
dc.identifier.citationSwaroop S, Gupta P, Patnaik S, Reddy SS. Intra-articular Steroid alone vs Hydrodilatation with intra-articular Steroid in Frozen Shoulder - A Randomised Control Trial. Malays Orthop J. 2023 Mar;17(1):34-39. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.2303.005en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/5902
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Various non-operative treatment modalities have been advocated for a frozen shoulder. In the present study we compared the efficacy of single intra-articular steroid injection vs hydrodilatation with intra-articular steroids for frozen shoulder (FS) in the frozen phase. Materials and methods: This was a prospective, randomised control trial (RCT) done at a tertiary care centre. A total of 108 participants were randomised into two groups-one group received intra-articular steroid with hydrodilatation (HDS) and other group received intra-articular steroid injection only (S). Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores were taken, and statistical analysis was done to measure the outcome at two weeks, six weeks and three-month intervals after the injection. Result: There was significant improvement in symptoms at each interval for both the groups (p=0.0). There was no statistically significant difference in the SPADI score between the two groups at two weeks post injection, however at six weeks (p=0.04) and 3 months (p=0.001) significant difference in the SPADI score was demonstrated with better scores in group S. The mean duration of analgesia required in group HDS was 5.17 days (S.D.=1.73) and for group S was 4.28 days (S.D.=1.01), with a statistical significance (p=0.002). Conclusion: Better clinical results were obtained at six weeks and three months with the group receiving corticosteroid only and also had a lesser requirement of analgesia post-intervention. Thus, intra-articular steroid injection only seems to be a more desirable method of management during the frozen phase of FS than that of hydrodilatation with intra-articular steroid injection.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMalaysian Orthopedic Associationen_US
dc.rights© 2023 Malaysian Orthopaedic Association (MOA). All Rights Reserved.
dc.subjectOrthopaedicsen_US
dc.titleIntra-articular steroid alone vs hydrodilatation with intra-articular steroid in frozen shoulder - A Randomised Control Trialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.source.journaltitleMalaysian Orthopaedic Journalen_US
dc.source.volume17
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpage34
dc.source.endpage39
dc.source.countryMalaysia
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
dc.contributor.trustauthorGupta, P
dc.contributor.departmentTrauma and Orthopaedicsen_US
dc.contributor.roleMedical and Dentalen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationSiksha 'O' Anusandhan Institute of Medical Sciences and SUM Hospital; Sandwell and West Birmingham NHS Trusten_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record