British journal of sports medicine · 2017
The effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave therapy in common lower limb conditions: a systematic review including quantification of patient-rated pain reduction.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Korakakis Vasileios, Whiteley Rodney, Tzavara Alexander, Malliaropoulos Nikolaos
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in treating Achilles tendinopathy (AT), greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS), medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS), patellar tendinopathy (PT) and proximal hamstring tendinopathy (PHT).
DESIGN: Systematic review.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised and non-randomised studies assessing ESWT in patients with AT, GTPS, MTSS, PT and PHT were included. Risk of bias and quality of studies were evaluated.
RESULTS: Moderate-level evidence suggests (1) no difference between focused ESWT and placebo ESWT at short and mid-term in PT and (2) radial ESWT is superior to conservative treatment at short, mid and long term in PHT. Low-level evidence suggests that ESWT (1) is comparable to eccentric training, but superior to wait-and-see policy at 4 months in mid-portion AT; (2) is superior to eccentric training at 4 months in insertional AT; (3) less effective than corticosteroid injection at short term, but ESWT produced superior results at mid and long term in GTPS; (4) produced comparable results to control treatment at long term in GTPS; and (5) is superior to control conservative treatment at long term in PT. Regarding the rest of the results, there was only very low or no level of evidence. 13 studies showed high risk of bias largely due to methodology, blinding and reporting.
CONCLUSION: Low level of evidence suggests that ESWT may be effective for some lower limb conditions in all phases of the rehabilitation.
DESIGN: Systematic review.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised and non-randomised studies assessing ESWT in patients with AT, GTPS, MTSS, PT and PHT were included. Risk of bias and quality of studies were evaluated.
RESULTS: Moderate-level evidence suggests (1) no difference between focused ESWT and placebo ESWT at short and mid-term in PT and (2) radial ESWT is superior to conservative treatment at short, mid and long term in PHT. Low-level evidence suggests that ESWT (1) is comparable to eccentric training, but superior to wait-and-see policy at 4 months in mid-portion AT; (2) is superior to eccentric training at 4 months in insertional AT; (3) less effective than corticosteroid injection at short term, but ESWT produced superior results at mid and long term in GTPS; (4) produced comparable results to control treatment at long term in GTPS; and (5) is superior to control conservative treatment at long term in PT. Regarding the rest of the results, there was only very low or no level of evidence. 13 studies showed high risk of bias largely due to methodology, blinding and reporting.
CONCLUSION: Low level of evidence suggests that ESWT may be effective for some lower limb conditions in all phases of the rehabilitation.