Analysis of muscular elasticity according to infrared and ultrasound therapy by sonoelastography.
Yeong-Jun Park, Hae-Kag Lee, Jae-Hwan Cho
PMID 30154594WHAT IT FOUND
Ultrasound gave a measured forearm elasticity increase of 1.55 folds, versus 1.23 folds for infrared, in 10 men without previous forearm or calf medical history.
Calf elasticity did not differ significantly.
Key findings
01Forearm muscle elasticity increased 1.55 ± 0.41 folds with ultrasound and 1.23 ± 0.10 folds with infrared, and ultrasound was greater (p<0.05).
02Calf muscle elasticity did not differ significantly between ultrasound and infrared (p>0.05).
03Forearm ultrasound elasticity increase was correlated with body weight (r=0.36), BMI (r=0.37), and fat mass (r=0.46).
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 10 men were studied, and they had no previous forearm or lower calf medical history, so this does not show what happens in patients with pain or stiffness. The average age was 22.15 ± 7.75 years, and the paper says measurement was not done for various regions or depth. The outcomes were sonoelastography elasticity values, not pain, stiffness, function, or treatment outcomes. The paper does not describe randomisation, blinding, allocation concealment, or treatment order. The methods text is unclear about the infrared treatment timing because it mentions ultrasound for 10 minutes in the infrared section.
Declared interests
This work was supported in part by the Soonchunhyang University Research Fund. The authors declared no conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the increased elasticity as proof that ultrasound or infrared treats pain or stiffness. The study measured elasticity in 10 men without previous forearm or calf medical history and did not report clinical outcomes.