|
Fantastic findings
Journal of Prolotherapy.
2010;2(4):480-486.
A Retrospective Observational Study on Hackett-Hemwall Dextrose
Prolotherapy for Unresolved Hand and Finger Pain at an Outpatient Charity Clinic
in Rural Illinois
Ross A. Hauser,
MD; Nicole M. Baird, CHFP; Joe
J. Cukla, LPN
abstract
Hand and finger pain and stiffness are common problems that
can affect the productivity of those afflicted, especially in
regard to their activities of daily living.
Prolotherapy is an
injection treatment used to initiate a healing response in
injured connective tissues such as tendons and ligaments,
tissues commonly involved with hand and finger injuries. A
retrospective observational study on
prolotherapy for hand and
finger pain was done at an outpatient charity clinic.
Objective: To investigate the outcomes of
patients undergoing
Hackett-Hemwall
dextrose
Prolotherapy
treatment for unresolved hand and finger pain.
Design: Forty patients, who had been in pain an
average of 55 months (4.6 years), were treated quarterly with
Hackett-Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy. Patients were contacted
an average of 18 months following their last Prolotherapy
session and asked questions regarding their levels of pain and
stiffness before and after their last
Prolotherapy treatment.
Results: In these 40 patients, 98% had
improvements in their pain. Eighty-two percent had 50% or more
pain relief. Dextrose Prolotherapy caused a statistically
significant decline in patients’ pain and stiffness.
Prolotherapy helped all but one patient on
pain medications
reduce the amount of medications taken. All 40 patients have
recommended
Prolotherapy to someone.
Conclusion: In this retrospective observational
study, Hackett- Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy treatments helped
reduce the pain and stiffness in patients with unresolved hand
and finger pain.
Introduction
The optimal long-term, symptomatic therapy for chronic hand
and finger pain has not been established. Symptomatic hand pain
and stiffness due to
Osteoarthritis
(OA) effect approximately
6-8% of the US adult population.1, 2
The prevalence of hand OA tends to be higher in women and
elderly persons.3-5 It may be
diagnosed via radiological tests (eg. X-ray), reported joint
symptoms, or a combination, with the most commonly affected
sites being the distal interphalangeal (DIP) and first
carpometacarpal (CMC) joints, followed by the proximal
interphalangeal (PIP) and other CMC joints.6
While hand osteoarthritis is a common cause of hand and finger
pain and stiffness in older populations, athletic injuries,
overuse, and excessive forces are the causes typically
associated with younger populations.7-9
Hand and finger pain may effect activities of daily living and
quality of life enough that they seek medical attention.
The traditional and conservative treatments for unresolved hand
and finger pain can include topical and oral analgesics,
non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDS) medications, rest,
exercise, splints and taping, corticosteroid injections, and
surgery, though each has its own risks or lack of efficacy.10-15
Two of the more widely used pain treatments include
corticosteroid injection and NSAID medications, however, these
can accelerate
osteoarthritis and further damage the joint.16,
17 In addition, anti-inflammatories may not provide much
long term pain relief, as seen in a randomized controlled trial
which showed that corticosteroid injections in the
carpometacarpal joint of the thumb for osteoarthritis were no
better than a placebo in reducing pain when compared at 24
weeks.18 Because of the
limited response of chronic joint pain to traditional therapies,
many people are turning to alternative therapies, including
Prolotherapy, for pain control.19, 20
Dextrose Prolotherapy is becoming more widely used for symptoms related to
pain and joint dysfunction in both integrative and allopathic medicine. Its
primary application is in pain abatement associated with tendinopathies and
ligament sprains in peripheral joints.21, 22
It is also being used in the treatment of spine and joint
degenerative
arthritis.23, 24 The effectiveness of
Prolotherapy is still being debated, with promising but mixed results being
reported.25-27
George S. Hackett, MD, coined the term
Prolotherapy.28
As he described it, “The treatment consists of the injection of a solution
within the relaxed
ligament and tendon which will stimulate the production of
new fibrous tissue and bone cells that will strengthen the “weld” of fibrous
tissue and bone to stabilize the articulation and permanently eliminate the
disability.”29 Dr. Hackett introduced
Prolotherapy to Gustav Hemwall, MD, in the mid-1950s. Dr. Hemwall continued Dr.
Hackett’s work after his death in 1969 and trained the majority of the
physicians who practiced the technique over the next 30 years.30
Hence the designation Hackett-Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy.
Animal studies have shown that
Prolotherapy induces the production of new
collagen by stimulating the normal inflammatory reaction.31,
32 In addition, animal experiments using dextrose Prolotherapy injections
at the
fibro-osseous
junction have shown measurable increases in ligament and
tendon diameter and strength, as evidenced upon post-mortem exam.33
K. Dean Reeves, MD, has conducted two human studies that showed Prolotherapy has
the potential to reverse degenerative arthritis. One of his studies involving
150 finger joints on 27 patients, indicated that after six series of
Prolotherapy injections a statistically significant improvement in joint
narrowing scores as revealed by X-rays, compared to a placebo, was seen in the
dextrose Prolotherapy group one year after treatment.34,
35 Prolotherapy is commonly taught and used for unresolved hand and
finger pain.36
However, other than Dr. Reeves’
aforementioned study, no other analysis regarding Prolotherapy and hand and
finger pain has been done. This observational study was undertaken to evaluate
the effectiveness of Hackett- Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy in regards to
reducing the subjects’ previously unresolved hand and finger pain and stiffness
and also its effectiveness in reducing or eliminating their need for pain
medications.
Patients & Methods
Framework and setting
In October 1994, the primary authors (R.H., M.H.) started a Christian charity
medical clinic called Beulah Land Natural Medicine Clinic in an impoverished
area in southern Illinois. The primary modality of treated offered was
Hackett-Hemwall
dextrose
Prolotherapy
for pain control. Dextrose was selected as the main ingredient in the
Prolotherapy solution because it is the most commonly used proliferant in
Prolotherapy, is
readily available, inexpensive (compared to other proliferants), and has a high
safety profile.37
The clinic met every three months until July 2005. All treatments were given
free of charge.
Patients
Patients who received
Prolotherapy
for their unresolved hand pain in the years 2002 to 2005 were called by
telephone and interviewed by a data collector (D.P.) who had no prior knowledge
of
Prolotherapy.
General inclusion criteria were an age of at least 18 years, having an
unresolved hand pain condition that typically responds to Prolotherapy, and a
willingness to undergo at least four Prolotherapy sessions, unless the pain
remitted with less number of Prolotherapy sessions. Typical hand conditions that
respond to Prolotherapy include hand and/or finger
Osteoarthritis,
ligament sprains and tendinopathies.
Interventions
The Hackett-Hemwall technique of Prolotherapy was
used. Each patient received 10 to 30 injections of a 15% dextrose, 0.2%
lidocaine solution with a total of 15 to 30cc of solution used per hand/finger.
Injections were given into and around the areas on the hand/fingers that were
painful and/or tender with palpation. The typical spots each injected with 0.5
to 1cc of solution can be seen in Figures 1a & 1b. Tender areas
injected included the carpometacarpal and metacarpophalangeal joints, proximal
and distal interphalangeal joints, as well as ligament and tendon attachments
around the hands and fingers. (See Figure 2.) As much as the pain would
allow, the patients were asked to cut down or stop other pain medications they
were taking.
| Figure 1a. Typical injection sites for
Hackett-Hemwall Prolotherapy of the hand. |
 |
| Figure 1b. Prolotherapy of the thumb,
carpometacarpal joint. |
 |
Outcomes
D.P. was the sole person obtaining the patient information during the
telephone interviews. The patients were asked a series of questions about their
pain and various symptoms before starting Prolotherapy. Their response to
Prolotherapy was also detailed with an emphasis on the effect Prolotherapy had
on their hand pain, stiffness and medication use. Specifically, patients were
asked questions concerning years of pain, pain intensity, stiffness, number of
physicians seen and medications taken and whether the response to Prolotherapy
continued after the Prolotherapy sessions stopped.
Analysis
For the analysis, patient percentages of the various responses were
calculated. These responses gathered from clients before Prolotherapy were then
compared with the responses to the same questions after Prolotherapy.
Patient Characteristics
Complete data was obtained on a total of 40 hands who met the inclusion
criteria. Of these, 75% (30) were female and 25% (10) were male. The average age
of the patients was 60 years-old. Patients reported an average of four years
seven months of pain and saw 2.8 MD’s before receiving Prolotherapy. The average
patient was taking 1.0 pain medications. The demographics of the patients can be
seen in Table 1.
Figure 2. Ligaments of the hand, thumb and
fingers.
Used with permission of
Ross A. Hauser, MD and Marion A. Hauser, MS, RD,
Beulah Land Press © 2001, Prolo Your Sports Injuries Away! Curing
Sports Injuries and Enhancing Athletic Performance with Prolotherapy! |
 |
| Table 1. Patient Characteristics Prior to
Prolotherapy. |
| Hand patients |
n=40
|
| Percentage of female patients |
75%
|
| Percentage of male patients |
25%
|
| Average age |
60
|
| Average years of pain |
4.6
|
| Average number of MD’s seen |
2.8
|
| Average pain medications |
1
|
| No other treatment options available |
38%
|
| Surgery only other option |
7%
|
Treatment Outcomes
Patients received an average of 4.5 Prolotherapy treatments per hand/finger.
The average time of follow-up after their last Prolotherapy session was eighteen
months.
Patients were asked to rate their pain and stiffness levels on a scale of 1 to
10 with 1 being no pain/stiffness and 10 being severe crippling pain/stiffness.
The 40 hands had an average starting pain and stiffness level of 5.9 and 5.6
respectively. Their ending pain and stiffness levels were 2.6 and 2.7
respectively. Thirty-five percent had a starting pain level of 8 or greater,
while only 10% had a starting pain level of two or less, whereas after
Prolotherapy none had a pain level of 8 or greater while 65% had a pain level of
two or less. (See Figure 3.)
Ninety-eight percent of patients stated their hand pain was less after
Prolotherapy. Over 71% said the improvements in their pain and stiffness since
their last Prolotherapy session have continued 100%. Eighty-two percent of
patients stated Prolotherapy relieved them of at least 50% of their pain. (See
Figure 4.) In regard to pain medication usage, before Prolotherapy the
average patient was taking 1.0 pain medications but this decreased to 0.5
medications after Prolotherapy. Before Prolotherapy, 11 patients were taking two
or more medications but this decreased to three people after Prolotherapy. Of
patients not taking pain medications upon completion of their Prolotherapy
series, none reported subsequently restarting pain medication due to hand or
finger pain.
To a simple yes or no question: “Has Prolotherapy changed your life for the
better?” 95% percent of patients treated answered “Yes.”
Seventy-five percent came to receive their first Prolotherapy session on the
recommendation of a friend. One hundred percent of these patients have
recommended Prolotherapy to someone else.
Figure 3. Pain levels and stiffness levels before and after receiving
Hackett-Hemwall Prolotherapy in 40 patients with unresolved hand pain.

Figure 4. Percentage of people who reported 50% or greater pain relief.

Statistical Analysis
A matched sample paired t-test was used to calculate the difference in
responses between the before and after measures for pain and stiffness for the
40 patients. Using the paired t-test, all p values for pain and stiffness for
the two groups reached statistical significance at the p < 0.000001 level or
less. (See Table 2.)
| Table 2. Summary of results of
Hackett-Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy hand study. |
| Total number of patients |
40
|
| Average months of pain |
55
|
| Average pain level before Prolotherapy |
5.9
|
| Average pain level after Prolotherapy |
2.6
|
| Paired t ratio |
15.534
|
| P value |
p < .000001
|
| Average stiffness level before
Prolotherapy |
5.6
|
| Average stiffness level after Prolotherapy |
2.7
|
| Paired t ratio |
13.477
|
| P value |
p < .000001
|
| Greater than 50% pain relief |
82%
|
Discussion
Principle Findings
The results of this retrospective, uncontrolled observational study, show
that Prolotherapy helps decrease pain and stiffness in patients with previously
unresolved hand/ finger pain. The Hackett-Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy gave 82%
of them 50% or more pain relief. Medication use was also lessened after
Prolotherapy.
Strengths and Limitations
Our study cannot be compared to a clinical trial in which an intervention is
investigated under controlled conditions. Instead, it is intended to document
the response of patients with unresolved hand and finger pain and stiffness to
Prolotherapy at a charity medical clinic.
The quality of the cases is a strength in this study. The average reported
length of pain was four years, seven months. The average patient had seen 2.8
MD’s prior to receiving Prolotherapy. Plainly, these represented chronic
unresponsive hand and finger pain cases. The only therapy provided for the
patients at the clinic was Prolotherapy, which was administered every three
months. In private practice, Hackett-Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy is typically
given every four to six weeks. The treating physician may also assess and
recommend additional measures to improve a patient’s overall health, such as
diet/nutritional intervention, exercise, work/ergonomic changes, changes in
medications, and other medical care. Patients are often weaned off
anti-inflammatory and opiod medications prior to, or at the start of the
treatment series. Since this was a free medical clinic where no additional
services were able to be rendered, the results of this study are likely an
indication of the lowest level of success with Hackett-Hemwall dextrose
Prolotherapy. This makes the results more remarkable. Decrease in pain
medication was also documented.
A shortcoming of the study is the subjective nature of the evaluated parameters,
including pain and stiffness levels. However, the documented decrease in
medication was documented and objective. An additional limitation of our study
is the lack of radiologic (X-ray or MRI) correlation for diagnosis and response
to treatment. Further, there was a lack of physical examination documentation to
group the patients into various diagnostic categories.
Interpretation of findings
Hackett-Hemwall dextrose Prolotherapy was shown to be very effective in
reducing pain and stiffness in this group of patients with unresolved hand and
finger pain. Prolotherapy is the injection of a solution for the purpose of
tightening and strengthening weak tendons, ligaments or joint capsules.
Prolotherapy works by stimulating the body to repair these soft tissue
structures. It starts and accelerates the inflammatory healing cascade by which
fibroblasts proliferate.38 Fibroblasts are the cells through which collagen is
made and by which ligaments, cartilage, and tendons repair.39 Prolotherapy has
been shown in one double-blinded animal study in a six-week period to increase
ligament mass by 44%, ligament thickness by 27% and the ligament-bone junction
strength by 28%.40 In other studies on
Prolotherapy, biopsies performed after the completion of Prolotherapy showed
statistically significant increases in tendon and ligament collagen fiber and
diameter of 60%.41, 42 This is significant
since ligament injury has been implicated as the cause of degenerative
osteoarthritis in joints.43 When a ligament is
damaged, stretched, or torn, it can cause joint instability. The joint
instability due to the ligament injury/laxity causes uneven stress distribution,
which leads to joint degeneration and resulting pain and can help identify those
who are predisposed to the development of OA.44, 45
Although the joints in the hands and fingers are non-weight bearing, they are
very mobile and subject to cartilage breakdown from overuse or excessive force.46
Fleming et al. explain in their article on ligament injuries and osteoarthritis,
“The ligament-injured joint is at high risk for osteoarthritis. Current
conservative (e.g. rehabilitation) and surgical (e.g. reconstruction) treatment
options appear not to reduce osteoarthritis following ligament injury.
Mechanical instability is the likely initiator of osteoarthritis in the
ligament-injured patient.”47 The stability of
the carpometacarpal joints of the fingers and thumbs depends on the integrity of
the articular surfaces of the bones and on the health of the ligaments and
muscles attached to them.48 Without addressing
the ligament laxity, sequelae from ligament injury can include chronic pain,
chronically unstable or deformed joints.49
Current conservative and traditional chronic pain treatments, such as for hand
pain, do not work to repair ligament laxity, but generally do temporarily block
the pain.50 Because Prolotherapy corrects
underlying ligament physiology and biomechanics, it has the potential not only
stop the pain but also the degenerative process.51
In his study on finger pain, Dr. K. Dean Reeves and associates showed that six
series of injections of dextrose Prolotherapy not only caused improvements in
pain and range of motion of the fingers, but also statistically significant
improvement in joint narrowing score on Xrays compared to placebo.52
This current study adds to the scientific literature that Prolotherapy helps
decrease pain, stiffness, and medication usage for patients suffering with
chronic hand and finger pain. More research is needed to see if indeed
Prolotherapy can actually reverse the arthritic process.
Conclusions
The Hackett-Hemwall technique of dextrose Prolotherapy used on patients who
had an average duration of four years, seven months of unresolved hand and
finger pain and who were 18 months out from their last Prolotherapy session was
shown to cause a statistically significant decline in their pain and stiffness.
Since this small retrospective study showed promising results, further studies
under more controlled circumstances and with larger patient populations should
be done.
Bibliography
|
1. |
Zhang Y, et al. Prevalence of
symptomatic hand osteoarthritis and its impact on functional status
among the elderly. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:1021–1027. |
|
2. |
Dillon CF, et al. Symptomatic hand
osteoarthritis in the United States: prevalence and functional
impairment stimates from the third US national health and nutrition
examination survey. Am J PM&R. 2007;86(1):12–21. |
|
3. |
Dauaghin S, et al. Prevalence and
determinants of one month hand pain and hand related disability in the
elderly (Rotterdam study). Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:99–104. |
|
4. |
Wilder FV, et al. Joint-specific
prevalence of osteoarthritis of the hand. Osteoarthritis Cartilage.
2006;14(9):953–957. |
|
5. |
Mannoni A, et al. Epidemiological
profile of symptomatic osteoarthritis in older adults: a population
based study in Dicomano, Italy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62:576–578. |
|
6. |
Nevitt M. Risk factors for knee,
hip and hand osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Handbook. Abingdon,
Oxon. Taylor & Francis, 2006; pp: 25. |
|
7. |
Larsen CF, et al. The epidemiology
of hand injuries in the Netherlands and Denmark. European Journal of
Epidemiology. 2004;19:323–327. |
|
8. |
Peterson JJ, et al. Injuries of
the fingers and thumb in the athlete. Clin Sports Med.
2006;25:527–542. |
|
9. |
Rettig A. Athletic injuries of the
wrist and hand, part 2. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(1);262–273. |
|
10. |
Gomes Carreira AC, et al.
Assessment of the effectiveness of a functional splint for
osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint on the dominant hand: a
randomized controlled study. J Rehabil Med. 2010;42(5):469–74. |
|
11. |
Zhang W, et al. EULAR evidence
based recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis: report
of a task force of the EULAR standing committee for international
clinical studies including therapeutics. Ann Rheum Dis.
2007;66:377–388. |
|
12. |
Combs JA. It’s not “just a
finger.” Journal of Athletic Training. 2000;35(2):168–178. |
|
13. |
Wajon A, et al. No difference
between two splint and exercise regimens for people with osteoarthritis
of the thumb: a randomized controlled trial. Aust J Physiother.
2005;51:245–249. |
|
14. |
Wajon A, et al. Surgery for thum
(trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst
Rev. 2009 Oct 7;(4): CD004631. |
|
15. |
Jain et al. Evaluation of
transdermal steroids for trapeziometacarpal arthritis. J Hand Surg.
2010;35A:921–927. |
|
16. |
Hauser R.
The deterioration of articular cartilage in osteoarthritis by corticosteroid injections.
JOP. 2009;1(2):107–123. |
|
17. |
Hauser R.
The acceleration of articular cartilage degeneration in osteoarthritis by nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs. JOP. 2010;2(1):305–322. |
|
18. |
Meenagh GK, et al. A randomized
controlled trial of intraarticular corticosteroid injection of the
carpometacarpal joint of the thumb in osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis.
2004;63:1260–1263. |
|
19. |
Alternative treatments: dealing
with chronic pain. Mayo Clinic Health Letter. April 2005.23(4). |
|
20. |
Lennard T. Pain Procedures in
Clinical Practice. Second Edition. Philadelphia, PA: Hanley and
Belfus, Inc; 2000. |
|
21. |
Hackett G, et al. Ligament and
Tendon Relaxation Treated by Prolotherapy, 5th ed. Oak Park, IL,
Gustav A. Hemwall; 1991. |
|
22. |
Reeves KD. Prolotherapy: present
and future applications in soft tissue pain and disability. Phys Med
Rehabil Clin North Am. 1995;6:917–926. |
|
23. |
Kayfetz D. Occipital-cervical
(whiplash) injuries treated by Prolotherapy. Medical Trial Technique
Quarterly. 1963;June:9–29. |
|
24. |
Ongley MJ, et al. A new approach
to the treatment of chronic low back pain. The Lancet. 1987;
July:143–147. |
|
25. |
Echow E. A randomized,
double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sclerosing injections in
patients with chronic low back pain. Rheumatology. Oxford.
1999;38(12):1255–9. |
|
26. |
Klein RG, et al. A randomized
double-blind trial of dextroseglycerine-phenol injections for chronic
low back pain. Journal of Spinal Disorders. 1993;6(1):23–33. |
|
27. |
Yelland MJ. Prolotherapy
injections, saline injections and exercises for chronic low back pain: a
randomized trial. Spine. 2004;29(1):9–16. |
|
28. |
Hackett G. Referral pain and
sciatica in diagnosis of low back disability. Journal of the
American Medical Association. 1957;163:183–185. |
|
29. |
Hackett G, et al. Ligament and
Tendon Relaxation Treated by Prolotherapy, 5th ed. Oak Park, IL:
Gustav A. Hemwall; 1992. |
|
30. |
Hauser R, et al. Prolo Your
Pain Away! Third Edition. Oak Park, IL: Beulah Land Press; 2007. p.
49. |
|
31. |
Schwarz R.
Prolotherapy: a
literature review and retrospective study. Journal of Neurology,
Orthopedic Medicine and Surgery. 1991;12:220–229. |
|
32. |
Schmidt H. Effect of growth
factors on proliferation of fibroblasts from the medial collateral and
anterior cruciate ligaments. Journal of Orthopaedic Research.
1995;13:184–190. |
|
33. |
Hackett G. Joint stabilization: an
experimental, histiologic study with comments on the clinical
application in ligament proliferation. American Journal of Surgery.
1955;89:968–973. |
|
34. |
Reeves KD, Hassanein K.
Randomized prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study
of dextrose prolotherapy for knee osteoarthritis with or without ACL
laxity. Alt Ther Hlth Med
2000;6(2):68-80 |
|
35. |
Reeves KD, Hassanein K.
Randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled
double-blind study on dextrose prolotherapy for osteoarthritic thumb and
finger (dip, pip, and trapeziometacarpal) joints: evidence of clinical
efficacy. Jnl Alt Compl Med 2000 6(4): (311-320) |
|
36. |
Hackett G. Back pain following
trauma and disease – Prolotherapy. Military Medicine.
1961;July:517–525. |
|
37. |
Hauser R, et al. Prolo Your
Pain Away! Third Edition. Oak Park, IL: Beulah Land Press; 2007. p.
21–22. |
|
38. |
Ravin T, et al. Principles of
Prolotherapy. Denver, CO: Amercian Academy of Musculoskeletal
Medicine. 2008. p. 13–34. |
|
39. |
Reeves K. Prolotherapy: basic
science, clinical studies and technique. In: Lennard TA, ed: Pain
Procedures in Clinical Practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Hanley
and Belfus: 2000:172–190. |
|
40. |
Liu Y. An in situ study of the
influence of a sclerosing agent in rabbit medial collateral ligaments
and its junction strength. Connective Tissue Research.
1983;2:95–102. |
|
41. |
Maynard J. Morphological and
biomechanical effects of sodium morrhuate on Tendons. Journal of
Orthopaedic Research. 1985;3:236–248. |
|
42. |
Klein R. Proliferant injections
for low back pain: histologic changes of injected ligaments and
objective measures of lumbar spine mobility before and after treatment.
Journal of Neurology, Orthopedic Medicine and Surgery.
1989;10:141–144. |
|
43. |
Alderman D. Prolotherapy for knee
pain. Practical Pain Management. July/August 2007:70–79. |
|
44. |
Nevitt M. Risk factors for knee,
hip and hand osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Handbook. Abingdon,
Oxon. Taylor & Francis, 2006; pp: 25. |
|
45. |
Wheeless C. CMC Joint/CMC
Arthritis. Duke Orthopaedics. Wheeless’ Textbook of Orthopaedics.
Available at:
http://www.wheelessonline.com/ortho/cmc_joint_cmc_arthritis. Accessed
July 20, 2010. |
|
46. |
Wheaton M, et al. The ligament
injury connection to osteoarthritis. Journal of Prolotherapy.
2010;(2)1:294–304. |
|
47. |
Fleming BC, et al. Ligament
injury, reconstruction and osteoarthritis. Curr Opin Orthop.
2005;October.16(5):354–362. |
|
48. |
Bora W, et al. The treatment of
injuries to the carpometacarpal joint of the little finger. J Bone
Joint Surg AM. 1974;56:1459–1463. |
|
49. |
Lese A. Hand injury, soft tissue.
e-medicine from Web MD/Medscape. September 29, 2008. Available at:
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/826498-overview. Accessed May 11,
2010. |
|
50. |
American Pain Foundation.
Treatment options: a guide for people living with pain. Available
at:
http://www.painfoundation.org/learn/publications/files/TreatmentOptions2006.pdf.
Accessed August 20, 2010. |
|
51. |
Hauser R. The regeneration of
articular cartilage with Prolotherapy. JOP. 2009;1(1):39–44. |
|
52. |
Reeves K, et al.
Randomized,
prospective placebo-controlled double-blind study of dextrose Prolotherapy for osteoarthritic thumb and finger joints: evidence of
clinical efficacy. Journal of Alternative and Complementary
Medicine. 2000;6:311–320. |
|