Comparing Dry Needle Therapy and Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

IF 1.9 Q2 REHABILITATION
Zonglin Li MD , Yubin Chen MD , Lili Chen MD , Jinshen He MD
{"title":"Comparing Dry Needle Therapy and Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials","authors":"Zonglin Li MD ,&nbsp;Yubin Chen MD ,&nbsp;Lili Chen MD ,&nbsp;Jinshen He MD","doi":"10.1016/j.arrct.2025.100432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and needling therapy in the treatment of tendinopathy.</div></div><div><h3>Data sources</h3><div>PubMed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from August 5, 2024, to August 25, 2024, for comparative studies of needling therapy and ESWT for the treatment of tendinopathy published between January 1, 2000, and August 5, 2024.</div></div><div><h3>Study Selection</h3><div>Two reviewers independently reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported a comparison of needling therapy and ESWT for tendinopathy for inclusion eligibility.</div></div><div><h3>Data Extraction</h3><div>Outcomes of interest were the visual analog scale (VAS) score and pressure pain threshold (PPT) score. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included RCTs with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Effect sizes were estimated using mean differences (MDs), and the significance level was estimated using the <em>P</em> value of the overall effect.</div></div><div><h3>Data Synthesis</h3><div>Nine RCTs involving 528 patients were deemed suitable for inclusion. Six RCTs involving 318 patients revealed that VAS scores showed no significant difference between ESWT and dry needling in either the immediate (MD, 0.06; 95% CI, −0.30 to 0.43; <em>P</em>=.73) or delayed effects (MD, −0.46; 95% CI, −2.10 to 1.18; <em>P</em>=.59). Two RCTs involving 132 patients revealed that PPT scores showed no significant difference between ESWT and dry needling in delayed effects (MD, −0.08; 95% CI, −0.30 to 0.14; <em>P</em>=.49). Three studies that enrolled 161 subjects concluded that ESWT combined with dry needling therapy was statistically more effective in reducing VAS scores in patients with tendinopathy than pure ESWT for delayed effects (MD, −1.79; 95% CI, −2.60 to −0.97; <em>P</em>&lt;.0001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This meta-analysis shows that the combination of ESWT with needling therapy is more effective in reducing pain indices in patients with enthesopathy than using ESWT or needling therapy alone. ESWT, combined with needling therapy, should be prioritized for conservative treatment in patients with tendinopathy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72291,"journal":{"name":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 100432"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109525000072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and needling therapy in the treatment of tendinopathy.

Data sources

PubMed (Medline), the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from August 5, 2024, to August 25, 2024, for comparative studies of needling therapy and ESWT for the treatment of tendinopathy published between January 1, 2000, and August 5, 2024.

Study Selection

Two reviewers independently reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported a comparison of needling therapy and ESWT for tendinopathy for inclusion eligibility.

Data Extraction

Outcomes of interest were the visual analog scale (VAS) score and pressure pain threshold (PPT) score. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included RCTs with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Effect sizes were estimated using mean differences (MDs), and the significance level was estimated using the P value of the overall effect.

Data Synthesis

Nine RCTs involving 528 patients were deemed suitable for inclusion. Six RCTs involving 318 patients revealed that VAS scores showed no significant difference between ESWT and dry needling in either the immediate (MD, 0.06; 95% CI, −0.30 to 0.43; P=.73) or delayed effects (MD, −0.46; 95% CI, −2.10 to 1.18; P=.59). Two RCTs involving 132 patients revealed that PPT scores showed no significant difference between ESWT and dry needling in delayed effects (MD, −0.08; 95% CI, −0.30 to 0.14; P=.49). Three studies that enrolled 161 subjects concluded that ESWT combined with dry needling therapy was statistically more effective in reducing VAS scores in patients with tendinopathy than pure ESWT for delayed effects (MD, −1.79; 95% CI, −2.60 to −0.97; P<.0001).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis shows that the combination of ESWT with needling therapy is more effective in reducing pain indices in patients with enthesopathy than using ESWT or needling therapy alone. ESWT, combined with needling therapy, should be prioritized for conservative treatment in patients with tendinopathy.
比较干针疗法和体外冲击波疗法治疗腱鞘病:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析
目的通过系统回顾和荟萃分析,评价体外冲击波治疗(ESWT)和针刺治疗腱鞘病的疗效。数据来源:pubmed (Medline)、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science检索从2024年8月5日至2024年8月25日,检索2000年1月1日至2024年8月5日期间发表的针刺疗法和ESWT治疗肌腱病变的比较研究。研究选择两名评论者独立回顾了随机对照试验(rct),这些试验报道了针刺治疗和ESWT治疗肌腱病变的比较,以确定纳入资格。数据提取感兴趣的结果是视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和压痛阈值(PPT)评分。两位审稿人使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具独立评估纳入的rct的质量。使用平均差异(md)估计效应量,使用总体效应的P值估计显著性水平。9项随机对照试验纳入528例患者。涉及318例患者的6项随机对照试验显示,VAS评分显示ESWT和干针在即刻(MD, 0.06;95% CI,−0.30 ~ 0.43;P= 0.73)或延迟效应(MD, - 0.46;95% CI,−2.10 ~ 1.18;P = .59)。两项涉及132例患者的随机对照试验显示,ESWT和干针在延迟效应方面PPT评分无显著差异(MD,−0.08;95% CI,−0.30 ~ 0.14;P = 49)。纳入161名受试者的三项研究得出结论,ESWT联合干针治疗在降低肌腱病变患者的VAS评分方面比单纯ESWT在延迟效应方面更有效(MD, - 1.79;95% CI,−2.60 ~−0.97;术;。)。结论本荟萃分析显示,ESWT联合针刺治疗比单独使用ESWT或针刺治疗更能有效地减轻脑瘫患者的疼痛指数。腱鞘病患者保守治疗应优先考虑ESWT联合针刺治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信