Suppr超能文献

冲击波疗法治疗外侧肘痛的疗效和安全性的系统评价

Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of shock wave therapy for lateral elbow pain.

作者信息

Buchbinder Rachelle, Green Sally E, Youd Joanne M, Assendelft Willem J J, Barnsley Lesley, Smidt Nynke

机构信息

Monash Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

J Rheumatol. 2006 Jul;33(7):1351-63.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) for lateral elbow pain.

METHODS

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials using Cochrane Collaboration methodology.

RESULTS

Nine placebo-controlled trials (1006 participants) and one trial of ESWT versus steroid injection (93 participants) were included. The 9 placebo-controlled trials reported conflicting results, although 11 of 13 pooled analyses found no significant benefit of ESWT over placebo, e.g., weighted mean difference for improvement in pain (on a 100-point scale) from baseline to 4-6 weeks (pooled analysis of 3 trials, 446 participants) was -9.42 (95% CI -20.70 to 1.86). Two pooled results favored ESWT, e.g., relative risk of treatment success (at least 50% improvement in pain with resisted wrist extension at 12 weeks) for ESWT in comparison to placebo (pooled analysis of 2 trials, 192 participants) was 2.2 (95% CI 1.55 to 3.12). However, this finding was not supported by the results of 4 other trials that were unable to be pooled. Steroid injection was more effective than ESWT at 3 months after the end of treatment assessed by a reduction of pain of 50% from baseline [21/25 (84%) vs 29/48 (60%); p < 0.05]. Minimal adverse effects of ESWT were reported.

CONCLUSION

Based upon systematic review of 9 placebo-controlled trials, there is "platinum" level evidence that ESWT provides little or no benefit in terms of pain and function in lateral elbow pain. There is "silver" level evidence based upon one trial that steroid injection may be more effective than ESWT.

摘要

目的

确定体外冲击波疗法(ESWT)治疗外侧肘痛的疗效和安全性。

方法

采用Cochrane协作方法对随机对照试验进行系统评价。

结果

纳入9项安慰剂对照试验(1006名参与者)和1项ESWT与类固醇注射对比试验(93名参与者)。9项安慰剂对照试验结果相互矛盾,尽管13项汇总分析中有11项发现ESWT并不比安慰剂有显著优势,例如,从基线到4 - 6周疼痛改善情况(采用100分制)的加权平均差(3项试验的汇总分析,446名参与者)为-9.42(95%可信区间-20.70至1.86)。两项汇总结果支持ESWT,例如,与安慰剂相比,ESWT治疗成功的相对风险(12周时抗阻腕伸展疼痛至少改善50%)(2项试验的汇总分析,192名参与者)为2.2(95%可信区间1.55至3.12)。然而,这一发现未得到其他4项无法汇总的试验结果的支持。在治疗结束后3个月时,通过疼痛从基线降低50%评估,类固醇注射比ESWT更有效[21/25(84%)对29/48(60%);p<0.05]。报告的ESWT不良反应最小。

结论

基于对9项安慰剂对照试验的系统评价,有“白金”级证据表明ESWT在外侧肘痛的疼痛和功能方面几乎没有益处。基于一项试验有“银”级证据表明类固醇注射可能比ESWT更有效。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验