CAJ | 학술논문

目的：观察体外冲击波在胫骨应力性骨折患者的疗效，并观察体外冲击波治疗的安全性。方法对2011年1月至2012年9月在我院治疗的34例胫骨应力性骨折患者，随机分为试验组（19例）和对照组（15例）。试验组使用体外冲击波对骨折处进行干预。对照组采用石膏固定的方法治疗。治疗后每4周复查X片、CT，并检查全身状况、进行DOMS疲劳程度6级及股四头肌肌力评分、膝关节活动度测量。比较两组患者治疗后DOMS≤1级所需周数和患者的治疗-愈合时间（THT）。结果经治疗后患者均获得临床愈合。达到DOMS≤1级的时间：试验组为（12.21±1.62）周；对照组为（17.05±3.51）周，THT：试验组为（16.44±2.14）周；对照组为（20.20±2.19）周，试验组骨折DOMS≤1级的时间及愈合时间均优于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论体外冲击波对于应力性骨折的治疗在加速骨折愈合和缓解疼痛症状方面均明显优于传统治疗方法，并有效预防关节僵硬和肌力下降，疗效明确，具有确切的应用价值。
목적：관찰체외충격파재경골응력성골절환자적료효，병관찰체외충격파치료적안전성。방법대2011년1월지2012년9월재아원치료적34례경골응력성골절환자，수궤분위시험조（19례）화대조조（15례）。시험조사용체외충격파대골절처진행간예。대조조채용석고고정적방법치료。치료후매4주복사X편、CT，병검사전신상황、진행DOMS피로정도6급급고사두기기력평분、슬관절활동도측량。비교량조환자치료후DOMS≤1급소수주수화환자적치료-유합시간（THT）。결과경치료후환자균획득림상유합。체도DOMS≤1급적시간：시험조위（12.21±1.62）주；대조조위（17.05±3.51）주，THT：시험조위（16.44±2.14）주；대조조위（20.20±2.19）주，시험조골절DOMS≤1급적시간급유합시간균우우대조조，차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。결론체외충격파대우응력성골절적치료재가속골절유합화완해동통증상방면균명현우우전통치료방법，병유효예방관절강경화기력하강，료효명학，구유학절적응용개치。
Objective To compare the effects of extracorporeal shock waves and conventional methods for the treatment of tibia stress fractures, and to observe the effectiveness and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy. Methods 34 male soldiers, diagnosed the tibia stress fractures, in our hospital from January 2011 to September 2012, were randomly divided into experimental group (19 cases) and the control group (15 cases). The experimental group used extracorporeal shock wave treatment to treat fractures. Control group was used the plaster immobilization methods. After treatment, reviewed X-rays, CT, checked the general condition, and DOMS fatigue level 6 ratings, assessing the quadriceps muscle strength and measuring the angle of the knee joint activities every 4 weeks. Comparing two groups of patient's time of recover to DOMS≤1, and patient's treatment-healing-time (THT). Results After treatment, all patients were clinically healed. The time of recover to DOMS≤1 level:the experimental group was (12.21 ±1.62) weeks;the control group was (17.05±3.51) weeks, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). THT:the experimental group was (16.44±2.14) weeks;the control group was (20.20±2.19) weeks, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for stress fractures was significantly better than conventional treatment methods which accelerating fracture healing and relieving the pain. It has clear therapeutic effective and the exact application value.