Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation · 2025
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus Kinesio taping in treating musculoskeletal disorders: A GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Hesham Sallam Mariam, Shafiek Mustafa Saleh Marwa, Samy Haidy, Mohamed Sayed Mazen, Hesham Elkhodary Hadel, Ismail Hassan Mariam, Mohamed Mosaid Esraa, Jalal Abdelrahman Maryam, Mohamed Abdelwahab Eman, Fouad Elshafey Abdelrahman, Gomaa Mohamed Abeer, Ahmed Baioumy Yasmin, Tarek Hamouda Farah, Awad AlHarthy Bashayer, Ibrahim Abdelhamed Ahmed
Аннотация
BackgroundExtracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and Kinesio taping (KT) are used for musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs). Despite limited supporting evidence and misalignment with contemporary rehabilitation approaches, they endure in practice to relieve pain and enhance function; however, their comparative effectiveness remains uncertain.ObjectivesThis systematic review aimed to compare the effects of ESWT versus KT on pain, functionality, strength, and quality of life (Qol) in individuals with MSKDs.MethodsSystematic searches of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were performed across six databases from inception to June 2025. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. Risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane Collaboration tool (RoB 2.0). Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.ResultsFifteen RCTs (n = 907) were included. Comparative analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between ESWT and KT in improving pain 0.12 (95% CI: -0.17, 0. 41, p = 0.41), function 0.04 (95% CI: -0.43, 0.51; P = 0.86), strength 0.68 (95% CI: -7.46, 8.81; P = 0.87), or Qol (P >> 0.05) in the short-term. However, medium-term favored ESWT in pain -1.15 (95% CI: -1.52, -0.78, p < 0.00001) and function -0.89 (95% CI: -1.35, -0.42; P = 0.0002) over KT. The certainty of evidence for all outcomes was very low.ConclusionsVery low-quality evidence indicates no difference between ESWT and KT in improving pain, function, strength, and Qol in patients with MSKDs in the short-term, with a possible medium-term advantage for ESWT in improving pain and function. Our findings should be placed within the context of limited and geographically narrow evidence. High-quality, long-term RCTs are warranted.Other: No funding was received for this review. PROSPERO registration number (CRD42024559635).