体外冲击波治疗单药治疗跟腱病的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析

Journal of chiropractic medicine Pub Date : 2023-06-14 DOI:10.1016/j.jcm.2023.04.003

Magdalena Stania PhD , Jitka Malá PhD , Daria Chmielewska PhD

{"title":"体外冲击波治疗单药治疗跟腱病的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Magdalena Stania PhD , Jitka Malá PhD , Daria Chmielewska PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jcm.2023.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aim of this systematic review<span><span> and meta-analysis was to determine the therapeutic efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for </span>Achilles tendinopathy.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span><span>We searched PubMed, EBSCOHost, Ovid, and Embase<span> for randomized controlled trials. Databases were searched from their inception until the last entry (July 16, 2022). The methodological quality of the randomized controlled trials was rated with the </span></span>Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. For continuous data, we presented the mean difference (D) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed with </span><em>I<sup>2</sup></em> statistics. The random effects model was applied for the pooled effect estimates. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The very-low-quality evidence suggested that ESWT was no more effective in decreasing pain than any other conservative treatment (D: –0.8; 95% CI: –3.15, 1.56; <em>P</em> > .5; <em>I²</em> = 85.62%). No significant differences were found between the ESWT and control groups on the pooled Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles scores (D: 5.74; 95% CI: –15.02, 26.51; <em>P</em> = .58; I<sup>2</sup> = 92.28%), but the quality of evidence was very low.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>At present, the quality of the evidence is low; thus, the therapeutic efficacy of ESWT for Achilles tendinopathy is inconclusive.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94328,"journal":{"name":"Journal of chiropractic medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Efficacy of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy as a Monotherapy for Achilles Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Magdalena Stania PhD , Jitka Malá PhD , Daria Chmielewska PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcm.2023.04.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aim of this systematic review<span><span> and meta-analysis was to determine the therapeutic efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for </span>Achilles tendinopathy.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p><span><span>We searched PubMed, EBSCOHost, Ovid, and Embase<span> for randomized controlled trials. Databases were searched from their inception until the last entry (July 16, 2022). The methodological quality of the randomized controlled trials was rated with the </span></span>Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. For continuous data, we presented the mean difference (D) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed with </span><em>I<sup>2</sup></em> statistics. The random effects model was applied for the pooled effect estimates. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The very-low-quality evidence suggested that ESWT was no more effective in decreasing pain than any other conservative treatment (D: –0.8; 95% CI: –3.15, 1.56; <em>P</em> > .5; <em>I²</em> = 85.62%). No significant differences were found between the ESWT and control groups on the pooled Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles scores (D: 5.74; 95% CI: –15.02, 26.51; <em>P</em> = .58; I<sup>2</sup> = 92.28%), but the quality of evidence was very low.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>At present, the quality of the evidence is low; thus, the therapeutic efficacy of ESWT for Achilles tendinopathy is inconclusive.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of chiropractic medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of chiropractic medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1556370723000354\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of chiropractic medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1556370723000354","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

目的本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是确定体外冲击波疗法(ESWT)治疗跟腱病的疗效。方法检索PubMed、EBSCOHost、Ovid和Embase进行随机对照试验。数据库从创建到最后一个条目(2022年7月16日)进行搜索。随机对照试验的方法学质量用物理治疗证据数据库量表评定。对于连续数据，我们给出了均值差(D)和95%置信区间(CI)。采用I2统计量评估异质性。采用随机效应模型对合并效应进行估计。使用推荐分级、评估、发展和评价工具评估证据的质量。结果极低质量的证据表明，ESWT在减轻疼痛方面并不比任何其他保守治疗更有效(D: -0.8;95% ci: -3.15, 1.56;P比;5;i²= 85.62%)。ESWT组与对照组在victoria Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles总分上无显著差异(D: 5.74;95% ci: -15.02, 26.51;p = .58;I2 = 92.28%)，但证据质量很低。结论目前证据质量较低;因此，ESWT对跟腱病的治疗效果尚无定论。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

The Efficacy of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy as a Monotherapy for Achilles Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the therapeutic efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for Achilles tendinopathy.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EBSCOHost, Ovid, and Embase for randomized controlled trials. Databases were searched from their inception until the last entry (July 16, 2022). The methodological quality of the randomized controlled trials was rated with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. For continuous data, we presented the mean difference (D) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed with I² statistics. The random effects model was applied for the pooled effect estimates. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool.

Results

The very-low-quality evidence suggested that ESWT was no more effective in decreasing pain than any other conservative treatment (D: –0.8; 95% CI: –3.15, 1.56; P > .5; I² = 85.62%). No significant differences were found between the ESWT and control groups on the pooled Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles scores (D: 5.74; 95% CI: –15.02, 26.51; P = .58; I² = 92.28%), but the quality of evidence was very low.