Musculoskeletal ultrasonographic evaluation of perineural injection therapy versus therapeutic ultrasound in chronic lateral epicondylitis

Egyptian Rheumatology and Rehabilitation

Table 2 Comparison of tenderness grading scale, pain intensity measured by VAS scale, PRTEE score, and US findings before treatment in both groups

Clinical scores	PNI therapy group (pre-treatment) (n = 15)	TUS therapy group (pre-treatment) (n = 15)	p value	Significance
Tenderness grading scale [median (range)]	2 (1–3)	2 (2–3)	0.15	NS*
VAS [median (range)]	8 (4–10)	8 (5–10)	0.71	NS*
PRTEE score (mean ± SD)	53.29 ± 15.69	48.13 ± 9.58	0.29	NS*
US findings	US findings pre-treatment (PNI group)	US findings pre-treatment (TUS group)	p value	Significance
Hypoechoic area in CET (+ve/−ve) no.	14/1	13/2	1	NS^§
Disturbed fibrillar pattern (+ve/−ve) no.	9/6	11/4	0.439	NS^¶
Tendon thickness (cm) (mean ± SD)	0.534 ± 0.043	0.549 ± 0.072	0.482	NS^§
Enthesophyte (+ve/−ve) no.	9/6	8/7	0.713	NS^¶
Osteophyte (+ve/−ve) no.	4/11	3/12	1	NS^§
Calcification (+ve/−ve) no.	4/11	3/12	1	NS^§
Bone surface irregularity/erosion (+ve/−ve) no.	8/7	10/5	0.456	NS^¶
Tendon tear (+ve/−ve) no.	1/14	1/14	1	NS^§
Power Doppler signal (+ve/−ve) no.	4/11	4/11	1	NS^¶

Statistical methods used ^¶Chi-square test, *Student t test, and ^§Fisher exact test
CET common extensor tendon
The p value was considered non-significant (NS) if p > 0.05, significant (S) if p ≤ 0.05, highly significant (HS) if p ≤ 0.01, and very highly significant (HS) if p < 0.001
The table showed a non-significant difference in the pre-treatment clinical and ultrasonographic findings in both patient groups (p > 0.05)