Suppr超能文献

评估体外冲击波疗法对肌腱病疗效的系统评价和Meta分析的报告及方法学质量:一项范围综述

Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Evaluating Effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy on Tendinopathies: A Scoping Review.

作者信息

Shahabi Saeed, Bagheri Lankarani Kamran, Ezati Rozhin, ShahAli Shabnam

机构信息

Health Policy Research Center, Institute of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

Department of Occupational therapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

J Chiropr Med. 2024 Sep;23(3):136-151. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2024.08.007. Epub 2024 Sep 30.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of the published systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) that looked at the effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on tendinopathies and to summarize its effectiveness.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Scopus, PEDro, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, and REHABDATA was conducted. SRs/MAs that assessed the effectiveness of ESWT for treating tendinopathy were included. The methodological and reporting quality of the eligible SRs/MAs were assessed using AMSTAR-2 and the PRISMA checklist. In addition, the ROBIS tool was applied to evaluate the risk of bias (RoB).

RESULTS

Eighteen SRs/MAs were included. The overall methodological quality was "critically low." Furthermore, the reporting quality of the included reviews according to PRISMA criteria was not optimal. Based on the ROBIS, a total of 16.2% of the studies had a low RoB, 38.9% had an unclear RoB, and 44.4% of the studies were appraised as having a high RoB.

CONCLUSION

In this scoping review we found substantial limitations regarding the quality and RoB of SRs/MAs. Therefore, reviewers must consider the AMSTAR-2, PRISMA, and ROBIS tools to improve the quality of future studies.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估已发表的关于体外冲击波疗法(ESWT)对肌腱病影响的系统评价(无论是否进行荟萃分析,即SRs/MAs)的方法学质量和报告质量,并总结其有效性。

方法

对PubMed、Scopus、PEDro、科学网、Cochrane、Embase和REHABDATA进行检索。纳入评估ESWT治疗肌腱病有效性的SRs/MAs。使用AMSTAR-2和PRISMA清单评估符合条件的SRs/MAs的方法学质量和报告质量。此外,应用ROBIS工具评估偏倚风险(RoB)。

结果

纳入18项SRs/MAs。总体方法学质量“极低”。此外,根据PRISMA标准,纳入综述的报告质量并不理想。基于ROBIS,共有16.2%的研究偏倚风险低,38.9%的研究偏倚风险不明确,44.4%的研究被评估为偏倚风险高。

结论

在本范围综述中,我们发现SRs/MAs在质量和偏倚风险方面存在重大局限性。因此,综述作者必须考虑使用AMSTAR-2、PRISMA和ROBIS工具来提高未来研究的质量。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

6
Lateral elbow tendinopathy: surgery versus extracorporeal shock wave therapy.外侧肘肌腱病:手术与体外冲击波治疗。
Hand Surg Rehabil. 2021 Jun;40(3):263-267. doi: 10.1016/j.hansur.2020.12.008. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
7
Efficacy of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy for Achilles Tendinopathy: A Meta-analysis.体外冲击波疗法治疗跟腱病的疗效:一项荟萃分析。
Orthop J Sports Med. 2020 Feb 27;8(2):2325967120903430. doi: 10.1177/2325967120903430. eCollection 2020 Feb.
9
Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Insertional Achilles Tendinopathy.跟腱附着点病的非手术治疗选择
Foot Ankle Clin. 2019 Sep;24(3):505-513. doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2019.04.004. Epub 2019 May 22.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验