Disability and rehabilitation · 2026
Effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy on pain intensity and functional disability in chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Stachelski Renata Anddresa, Rosângela Buzanello Márcia, Flor Bertolini Gladson Ricardo, Carvalho Alberito Rodrigo de
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) on pain intensity and functional disability in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Google Scholar, and ProQuest were searched. The PICOS framework included individuals with CLBP receiving ESWT, compared with placebo, usual care, exercise, or physiotherapy. Randomized controlled trials reporting pain intensity and/or functional disability were included. Data on participant characteristics, interventions, comparators, and ESWT dosimetry were extracted.
RESULTS: Of 430 records identified, nine randomized controlled trials were included. Radial ESWT (rESWT) significantly reduced pain (SMD = -0.72; 95% CI -1.30 to -0.14; I2 = 76%), whereas focused ESWT (fESWT) showed benefit in one trial. Functional disability significantly improved overall (MD = -6.12; 95% CI -10.02 to -2.22; I2 = 75%), but the effect did not reach the minimal clinically important difference. Most studies evaluated outcomes only immediately post-intervention. Sensitivity analyses indicated influence of methodological quality and heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION: ESWT, particularly rESWT, may reduce pain in CLBP, but functional improvements are not clinically meaningful. Short follow-up and substantial heterogeneity limit the strength of recommendations. rESWT and fESWT should not be considered interchangeable.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD420251085206.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Google Scholar, and ProQuest were searched. The PICOS framework included individuals with CLBP receiving ESWT, compared with placebo, usual care, exercise, or physiotherapy. Randomized controlled trials reporting pain intensity and/or functional disability were included. Data on participant characteristics, interventions, comparators, and ESWT dosimetry were extracted.
RESULTS: Of 430 records identified, nine randomized controlled trials were included. Radial ESWT (rESWT) significantly reduced pain (SMD = -0.72; 95% CI -1.30 to -0.14; I2 = 76%), whereas focused ESWT (fESWT) showed benefit in one trial. Functional disability significantly improved overall (MD = -6.12; 95% CI -10.02 to -2.22; I2 = 75%), but the effect did not reach the minimal clinically important difference. Most studies evaluated outcomes only immediately post-intervention. Sensitivity analyses indicated influence of methodological quality and heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION: ESWT, particularly rESWT, may reduce pain in CLBP, but functional improvements are not clinically meaningful. Short follow-up and substantial heterogeneity limit the strength of recommendations. rESWT and fESWT should not be considered interchangeable.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD420251085206.