Dataset Information

A comparative study of the efficacy of ultrasonics and extracorporeal shock wave in the treatment of tennis elbow: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Tennis elbow or lateral epicondylitis is a common source of pain among craftsmen. Although it cannot be completely resolved, extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and ultrasonics (US) have been found to be effective for tennis elbow as highlighted in previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and reviews. However, the efficacy of these two therapies in treating tennis elbow is unknown. This meta-analysis compares the effectiveness of ESWT and US in relieving pain and restoring the functions of tennis elbow following tendinopathy.

Methods

RCTs published in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SpringerLink databases comparing ESWT and US in treating tennis elbow were identified by a software and manual search. The risk of bias and clinical relevance of the included studies were assessed. Publication bias was explored using funnel plot and statistical tests (Egger's test and Begg's test). The major outcomes of the studies were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3.

Results

Five RCTs comprising five patients were included in the present meta-analysis. The results revealed a significantly lower VAS score of pain in the ESWT group (1?month: MD?=?4.47, p?=?0.0001; 3?months: MD?=?20.32, p?ConclusionsAlthough there was no significant difference in the elbow function evaluation scores between ESWT and US, the superiority of the ESWT group in the VAS of pain (both at 1?month, 3?months, and 6?months follow-ups) raised grip strength in ESWT group and the scores for subjective evaluation of efficacy indicated that ESWT offers more effective therapy for lateral epicondylitis than US therapy.

SUBMITTER: Yan C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6683364 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A comparative study of the efficacy of ultrasonics and extracorporeal shock wave in the treatment of tennis elbow: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Yan Chenchen C Xiong Yuan Y Chen Lang L Endo Yori Y Hu Liangcong L Liu Mengfei M Liu Jing J Xue Hang H Abududilibaier Abudula A Mi Bobin B Liu Guohui G

Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research 20190806 1

<h4>Background</h4>Tennis elbow or lateral epicondylitis is a common source of pain among craftsmen. Although it cannot be completely resolved, extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and ultrasonics (US) have been found to be effective for tennis elbow as highlighted in previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and reviews. However, the efficacy of these two therapies in treating tennis elbow is unknown. This meta-analysis compares the effectiveness of ESWT and US in relieving p ...[more]

PMID: 31387611

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundExtracorporeal shock-wave therapy (ESWT), which can be divided into radial shock-wave therapy (RaSWT) and focused shock-wave therapy (FoSWT), has been widely used in clinical practice for managing orthopedic conditions. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical efficacy of ESWT for knee soft tissue disorders (KSTDs) and compare the efficacy of different shock-wave types, energy levels, and intervention durations.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive search of online databases and search engines without restrictions on the publication year or language. We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy of ESWT for KSTDs and included them in a meta-analysis and risk of bias assessment. The pooled effect sizes of ESWT were estimated by computing odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the treatment success rate (TSR) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs for pain reduction (i.e., the difference in pain relief, which was the change in pain from baseline to the end of RCTs between treatment and control groups) and for restoration of knee range of motion (ROM).ResultsWe included 19 RCTs, all of which were of high or medium methodological quality and had a Physiotherapy Evidence Database score of ≥5/10. In general, ESWT had overall significant effects on the TSR (OR: 3.36, 95% CI: 1.84-6.12, P < 0.0001), pain reduction (SMD: - 1.49, 95% CI: - 2.11 to - 0.87, P < 0.00001), and ROM restoration (SMD: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.43-2.09, P < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses revealed that FoSWT and RaSWT applied for a long period (≥1 month) had significant effects on pain reduction, with the corresponding SMDs being - 3.13 (95% CI: - 5.70 to - 0.56; P = 0.02) and - 1.80 (95% CI: - 2.52 to - 1.08; P < 0.00001), respectively. Low-energy FoSWT may have greater efficacy for the TSR than high-energy FoSWT, whereas the inverse result was observed for RaSWT.ConclusionsThe ESWT exerts an overall effect on the TSR, pain reduction, and ROM restoration in patients with KSTDs. Shock-wave types and application levels have different contributions to treatment efficacy for KSTDs, which must be investigated further for optimizing these treatments in clinical practice.

Project description:To assess the safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave myocardial revascularization (ESMR) therapy in treating patients with refractory angina pectoris.A single-arm multicenter prospective trial to assess safety and efficacy of the ESMR therapy in patients with refractory angina (class III/IV angina) was performed. Screening exercise treadmill tests and pharmacological single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were performed for all patients to assess exercise capacity and ischemic burden. Patients were treated with 9 sessions of ESMR to ischemic areas over 9 weeks. Efficacy end points were exercise capacity by using treadmill test as well as ischemic burden on pharmacological SPECT at 4 months after the last ESMR treatment. Safety measures included electrocardiography, echocardiography, troponin, creatine kinase, and brain natriuretic peptide testing, and pain questionnaires.Fifteen patients with medically refractory angina and no revascularization options were enrolled. There was a statistically significant mean increase of 122.3±156.9 seconds (38% increase compared with baseline; P=.01) in exercise treadmill time from baseline (319.8±157.2 seconds) to last follow-up after the ESMR treatment (422.1±183.3 seconds). There was no improvement in the summed stress perfusion scores after pharmacologically induced stress SPECT at 4 months after the last ESMR treatment in comparison to that at screening; however, SPECT summed stress score revealed that untreated areas had greater progression in ischemic burden vs treated areas (3.69±6.2 vs 0.31±4.5; P=.03). There was no significant change in the mean summed echo score from baseline to posttreatment (0.4±5.1; P=.70). The ESMR therapy was performed safely without any adverse events in electrocardiography, echocardiography, troponins, creatine kinase, or brain natriuretic peptide. Pain during the ESMR treatment was minimal (a score of 0.5±1.2 to 1.1±1.2 out of 10).In this multicenter feasibility study, ESMR seems to be a safe and efficacious treatment for patients with refractory angina pectoris. However, larger sham-controlled trials will be required to confirm these findings.

Project description:Background:Osteoarthritis is the most common musculoskeletal disease. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy had shown an effect on osteoarthritis in both some animal experiments and clinical studies, but there was no systematic review to confirm the value of shockwave therapy in the treatment of all types of osteoarthritis and compare it with other traditional therapies (especially traditional Chinese medicine). Method:PubMed, Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, WANFANG database, and VIP database were searched up to December 10, 2019, to identify randomized controlled trials comparing shockwave therapy and other treatments for osteoarthritis. Visual analogue scale and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index were extracted and analyzed by RevMan and STATA software as outcomes of pain reduction and functional improvement. Adverse reactions were recorded to evaluate the safety of shockwave therapy. Results:Shockwave therapy had significant improvement in both pain reduction and functional improvement compared with placebo, corticosteroid, hyaluronic acid, medication, and ultrasound (P < 0.05). In functional improvement, shockwave therapy showed statistical improvement compared with kinesiotherapy and moxibustion (P < 0.05) but not with acupotomy surgery (P = 0.24). A significant difference between shockwave therapy and platelet-rich plasma was observed in pain reduction (P < 0.05) but not in functional improvement (P = 0.89). Meanwhile, a statistical difference was found between shockwave therapy and fumigation in functional improvement (P < 0.05) but not in pain reduction (P = 0.26). Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference between shockwave therapy and manipulation in both pain reduction (P = 0.21) and functional improvement (P = 0.45). No serious adverse reaction occurred in all of studies. Conclusions:Extracorporeal shockwave therapy could be recommended in the treatment of osteoarthritis as a noninvasive therapy with safety and effectiveness, but the grade of recommendations needs to be discussed in a further study.

Dataset Information

A comparative study of the efficacy of ultrasonics and extracorporeal shock wave in the treatment of tennis elbow: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Publications

A comparative study of the efficacy of ultrasonics and extracorporeal shock wave in the treatment of tennis elbow: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets