Ilaria Covelli

Background: Complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS-I) is a condition characterised by pain, swelling, loss of function, trophic skin changes and vasomotor dysfunction. Biophysical stimulation with a specific combination of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) parameters exerts an anti-inflammatory effect, supporting the rehabilitation process. Materials and methods: We recruited 32 patients with CRPS-I of the foot or ankle, previously treated with an initial course of IV neridronate. Participants were randomised to one of two groups: a treatment programme combining PEMF (1.5 mT, 75 Hz; I-One ^® therapy, IGEA) for 4 h a day for 60 days and exercises for 30 min a day for 6 weeks (I-One ^® therapy group), or treatment with exercise only (control group). Patients were clinically assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months with: Visual Analogue Score (VAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score, allodynia, hyperalgesia, pain during passive range of motion (ROM), oedema, Roles and Maudsley scores and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) intake. Results: In both groups, VAS was significantly reduced and AOFAS improved significantly compared with baseline at all follow-up points. The I-One ^® therapy group saw statistically significant improvements compared with the control group at all follow-up points, not only in terms of VAS and AOFAS scores, but also in the resolution of allodynia, hyperalgesia and pain during passive ROM. At 3 months, the I-One ^® therapy group also showed a significantly lower intake of NSAIDs. The I-One ^® therapy group showed better patient satisfaction outcomes, with significantly lower Roles and Maudsley scores compared with the control group at 6 and 12 months. Conclusions: I-One ^® therapy in association with a rehabilitation program may offer additional benefits in terms of pain reduction, functional recovery, oedema, allodynia and hyperalgesia resolution and NSAIDs use in CRPS-I of the foot and ankle. Trial registration: registered on the ClinicalTrials.gov platform (NCT05922618) on 6 August 2023. Level of evidence: Level II, therapeutic study.

Background: Rhizarthrosis is the most frequent form of osteoarthritis and is responsible for pain, disability and reduced functionality. Recent studies support the possibility of providing Extracorporeal Shock Wave Treatment in patients suffering from osteoarthritis. Shock wave biostimulation may be able to modulate joint inflammation and stimulate chondorocytes in a reparative sense. The aim of the study is to investigate the clinical effects of shock wave treatment in patients suffering from arthritis of the first finger. Methods: A prospective clinical study was designed, in which seventy-two patients suffering from rhizoarthrosis were randomized to treatment with shock waves or exercises; in both groups an immobilization brace of the first finger was used. At recruitment and at 1, 3 and 6 months, patients received assessments of pain (VAS), functionality (FIHOA), disability (DASH); furthermore, the perception of improvement was monitored during follow-ups (Roles and Maudsley Score). Results: In both groups there was a significant improvement in all scores in the comparison between recruitment and 6 months; this improvement was confirmed for VAS, FIHOA and DASH in the comparison between individual time points in both groups, except for the comparison between 3 and 6 months for all scales in the exercise group and for FIHOA in both groups. The perception of improvement was statistically better in the shock wave group than in the exercise group at 1, 3 and 6 months. The regression analysis showed that the reduction of VAS and DASH are statistically influenced by shock wave treatment (p<0.001). Conclusions: Both shock waves and exercises, together with the use of the brace, are effective in managing pain, functionality and disability in patients suffering from arthritis of the first finger. The shock wave treatment ensured further improvement at 6 months

Plantar fasciitis is one of the most common causes of foot pain; in 35% of cases, it is also associated with bone edema of the heel. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between bone edema and the outcomes of temperature-controlled high-energy adjustable multi-mode emission laser (THEAL) and/or exercises in patients with plantar fasciitis. A prospective randomized clinical trial was designed, in which 48 patients suffering from plantar fasciitis, with or without bone edema, were treated with temperature-controlled high-energy adjustable multi-mode emission laser and exercises (the laser group) or with exercises only (the control group). The patients were evaluated at recruitment (T0) and at 2 (T1) and 6 months (T2), monitoring pain (with the Visual Analogue Scale), functionality (with the Foot Function Index), perception of improvement (with the Roles and Maudsley Score), and fascia thickness (with ultrasound examination). In both groups, there was a significant improvement in pain, functional recovery, perception of remission, and a reduction in plantar fascia thickness at T1 and T2. The laser group presented statistically better values at T2 for the Roles and Maudsley Score (z: 2.21; 0.027). The regression analysis showed that a greater reduction in fascia thickness occurred in the laser group (p-value: 0.047). In conclusion, the two conservative treatments were effective in patients suffering from plantar fasciitis, even in the presence of bone edema, but with lesser results.

Plantar fasciitis is one of the most common causes of foot pain; in a significant percentage it is also associated with bone edema of the heel. A prospective randomized clinical trial was designed, in which 48 patients suffering from plantar fasciitis, with or without bone edema, were treated with temperature controlled high energy adjustable multi-mode emission laser and exercises (laser group) or with exercises only (control group). Patients were evaluated at recruitment (T0), at 2 (T1) and 6 months (T2), monitoring pain (with Visual Analogue Scale), functionality (with Foot Function Index) and perception of improvement (with Roles and Maudsley Score) and fascia thickness (with ultrasound examination). In both groups there was a significant improvement in pain, functional recovery, perception of remission and a reduction in plantar fascia thickness at T1 and T2. The laser group presented statistically better values at T2 for the Roles and Maudsley Score (z: 2.21; 0.027). Regression analysis showed that a greater reduction in fascia thickness occurred in the laser group (p-value: 0.047). In conclusion, the two conservative treatments were effective in patients suffering from plantar fasciitis, even in the presence of bone edema, but with lesser results.

This study aimed to verify the comparative effectiveness of shock wave therapy versus therapeutic exercise, including the possibility of combining both therapies, in patients who did not respond to the first treatment. A prospective randomized clinical trial was carried out, predicting the possibility of a cross-over between the two treatment options, with patients who did not respond to either treatment. Treatments were, respectively, eccentric therapeutic exercise consisting of 30 min sessions of stretching and strengthening exercises, 5 days a week for 4 weeks (Groups A and D) and Extracorporeal Shock Waves Therapy (ESWT) according to a protocol of three sessions, one per week, each of 2000 pulses at a 4 Hz frequency and administering an energy flux density (EFD) varying between 0.03 mJ/mm² and 0.17 mJ/mm² (Groups B and C). Patients were evaluated at baseline (T0), 2 (T1), 4 (T2) and 6 months (T3) after the last session, using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Low Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) and Roles and Maudsley Scale (RMS). The whole study population demonstrated a progressive clinical reduction in pain according to NRS, a recovery from disability according to LEFS and a perception of recovery according to RMS within 6 months, with no significant differences between the four protocols (exercise; ESWT; exercise + ESWT; and ESWT + exercise). Both therapies are therefore valid options in patients with trochanteritis; the combination of the two therapies could be evaluated for those patients who do not respond to the single treatment.

Background: Rotator cuff tendinopathy is a common diagnosis among patients with shoulder pain and dysfunction. Laser therapy is recommended for the treatment of this tendon disease due to the possibility of increasing tissue biostimulation. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of HELT (high-energy laser therapy) in relation to the wavelengths of 650 nm, 810 nm, 980 nm, and 1064 nm administered. Methods: The study design was prospective and observational. Thirty patients with shoulder tendinopathy were recruited and treated in one of two high-energy laser therapy groups (5 Watt/cm², 450 Joule, super-pulsed mode). Group A received a high-energy laser therapy protocol with a single wavelength (1064 nm); group B received a high-energy laser therapy program with four wavelengths (650 nm, 810 nm, 980 nm, and 1064 nm). Pain (VAS), function (ASES), and disability (DASH) were monitored at the time of recruitment (T0), 1 month later (T1), and 6 months later (T2). Roles and Maudsley scores were also evaluated at T1 and T2. Results: Both protocols resulted in improvement of pain and in functional and disability recovery at the two times of assessment, without statistically significant differences. In group B, treated with the four wavelengths, a trend emerged, bordering on statistical significance, for a greater reduction in pain. Conclusions: The high-energy laser proved to be an effective therapy for the treatment of rotator cuff tendinopathy. The possibility of modulating the choice of wavelengths could allow the customization of the protocol in relation to the patient’s clinical condition.