Objectives. Local corticosteroid infiltration is a common practice of treatment for lateral epicondylitis. In recent studies no statistically significant or clinically relevant results in favour of corticosteroid injections were found. The injection of autologous blood has been reported to be effective for both intermediate and long-term outcomes. It is hypothesised that blood contains growth factors, which induce the healing cascade. Methods. A total of 60 patients were included in this prospective randomised study: 30 patients received 2 ml autologous blood drawn from contralateral upper limb vein + 1 ml 0.5% bupivacaine, and 30 patients received 2 ml local corticosteroid + 1 ml 0.5% bupivacaine at the lateral epicondyle. Outcome was measured using a pain score and Nirschl staging of lateral epicondylitis. Follow-up was continued for total of six months, with assessment at one week, four weeks, 12 weeks and six months. Results. The corticosteroid injection group showed a statistically significant decrease in pain compared with autologous blood injection group in both visual analogue scale (VAS) and Nirschl stage at one week (both p < 0.001) and at four weeks (p = 0.002 and p = 0.018, respectively). At the 12-week and six-month follow-up, autologous blood injection group showed statistically significant decrease in pain compared with corticosteroid injection group (12 weeks: VAS p = 0.013 and Nirschl stage p = 0.018; six months: VAS p = 0.006 and Nirschl p = 0.006). At the six-month final follow-up, a total of 14 patients (47%) in the corticosteroid injection group and 27 patients (90%) in autologous blood injection group were completely relieved of pain. Conclusions. Autologous blood injection is efficient compared with corticosteroid injection, with less side-effects and minimum recurrence rate

We have carried out a prospective double-blind randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy of a single subacromial injection of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, tenoxicam, with a single injection of methylprednisolone in patients with subacromial impingement. A total of 58 patients were randomly allocated into two groups. Group A received 40 mg of methylprednisolone and group B 20 mg of tenoxicam as a subacromial injection along with lignocaine. The Constant-Murley shoulder score was used as the primary outcome measure and the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) as secondary measures. Six weeks after injection the improvement in the Constant-Murley score was significantly greater in the methylprednisolone group (p = 0.003) than in the tenoxicam group. The improvement in the DASH score was greater in the steroid group and the difference was statistically significant and consistent two (p < 0.01), four (p < 0.01) and six weeks (p < 0.020) after the injection. The improvement in the OSS was consistently greater in the steroid group than in the tenoxicam group. Although the difference was statistically significant at two (p < 0.001) and four (p = 0.003) weeks after the injection, it was not at six weeks (p = 0.055). Subacromial injection of tenoxicam does not offer an equivalent outcome to subacromial injection of corticosteroid at six weeks. Corticosteroid is significantly better than tenoxicam for improving shoulder function in tendonitis of the rotator cuff after six weeks.

We performed a prospective, randomised trial on 106 patients to compare the effects of local corticosteroid injections with physiotherapy as advocated by Cyriax in the treatment of tennis elbow. The main outcome measures were the severity of pain, pain provoked by resisted dorsiflexion of the wrist, and patient satisfaction. At six weeks 22 of 53 patients in the injection group were free from pain compared with only three in the physiotherapy group. In the corticosteroid-treated group 26 patients had no pain on resisted dorsiflexion of the wrist compared with only three in the physiotherapy group. Thirty-five patients who had injections and 14 who had physiotherapy were satisfied with the outcome of treatment at six weeks. At the final assessment there were 18 excellent and 18 good results in the corticosteroid group and one excellent and 12 good results in the physiotherapy group. There was a significant increase in grip strength in both groups but those with injections had a significantly better result. After one year there were no significant differences between the two groups. Half of the patients, however, had received only the initial treatment, 20% had had combined therapy and 30% had had surgery. We conclude that at six weeks, treatment with corticosteroid injections was more effective than Cyriax physiotherapy and we recommend it because of its rapid action, reduction of pain and absence of side-effects