PP130 体外冲击波疗法对足底筋膜炎的疗效:系统回顾与元分析

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Youjin Jung, Seul Ki Lee
{"title":"PP130 体外冲击波疗法对足底筋膜炎的疗效:系统回顾与元分析","authors":"Youjin Jung, Seul Ki Lee","doi":"10.1017/s0266462323002428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Introduction</span><p>Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been used since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders, but there is considerable controversy regarding the effectiveness of ESWT. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to investigate the effectiveness of ESWT for plantar fasciitis.</p><span>Methods</span><p>A comprehensive search was conducted via electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled trials register, and 5 Korean databases from inception date to April 2022. Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted study data. Major outcomes were pain relief, function, and quality of life.</p><span>Results</span><p>We identified a total of 48 RCTs comparing ESWT with corticosteroid injection (n=14), conventional therapies (n=19), and sham control (n=21). Most studies included participants with chronic heel pain diagnosed as plantar fasciitis. All trials were susceptible to bias. In terms of pain results, ESWT showed no significant difference when compared with the steroid injection group and the conventional therapy group, and significant pain relief was confirmed only compared to the sham control group (Mean Difference -1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.44,-0.98; I2=70%;). Functional outcomes were significantly improved in the ESWT group compared to the steroid injection group (standardized mean difference 0.45; 95% CI 0.27,0.63; I2=0%) and the sham control group (SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.23,1.45; I2=91%), but no significant difference was found when compared to the conventional therapy group.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>Based upon the currently available low certainty evidence because of wide clinical diversity and varying treatment protocols of included trials, ESWT is associated with improved function and may be associated with pain reduction in plantar fasciitis. Further evidence is needed from well-designed studies with a standard dose and treatment protocol.</p>","PeriodicalId":14467,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PP130 The Effectiveness Of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy For Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Youjin Jung, Seul Ki Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0266462323002428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span>Introduction</span><p>Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been used since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders, but there is considerable controversy regarding the effectiveness of ESWT. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to investigate the effectiveness of ESWT for plantar fasciitis.</p><span>Methods</span><p>A comprehensive search was conducted via electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled trials register, and 5 Korean databases from inception date to April 2022. Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted study data. Major outcomes were pain relief, function, and quality of life.</p><span>Results</span><p>We identified a total of 48 RCTs comparing ESWT with corticosteroid injection (n=14), conventional therapies (n=19), and sham control (n=21). Most studies included participants with chronic heel pain diagnosed as plantar fasciitis. All trials were susceptible to bias. In terms of pain results, ESWT showed no significant difference when compared with the steroid injection group and the conventional therapy group, and significant pain relief was confirmed only compared to the sham control group (Mean Difference -1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.44,-0.98; I2=70%;). Functional outcomes were significantly improved in the ESWT group compared to the steroid injection group (standardized mean difference 0.45; 95% CI 0.27,0.63; I2=0%) and the sham control group (SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.23,1.45; I2=91%), but no significant difference was found when compared to the conventional therapy group.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>Based upon the currently available low certainty evidence because of wide clinical diversity and varying treatment protocols of included trials, ESWT is associated with improved function and may be associated with pain reduction in plantar fasciitis. Further evidence is needed from well-designed studies with a standard dose and treatment protocol.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462323002428\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462323002428","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自20世纪90年代以来,体外冲击波疗法(ESWT)已被用于治疗各种肌肉骨骼疾病,但关于ESWT的有效性存在相当大的争议。我们的目的是对随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统评价,以研究ESWT治疗足底筋膜炎的有效性。方法采用MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane对照试验注册库和5个韩国数据库,从建库之日起至2022年4月进行综合检索。两位综述作者独立评估了研究的纳入和偏倚风险,并提取了研究数据。主要结果为疼痛缓解、功能和生活质量。结果我们共确定了48项rct,将ESWT与皮质类固醇注射(n=14)、常规治疗(n=19)和假对照(n=21)进行比较。大多数研究包括慢性足跟疼痛诊断为足底筋膜炎的参与者。所有的试验都容易产生偏倚。在疼痛结果方面,ESWT与类固醇注射组和常规治疗组相比无显著差异,仅与假对照组相比有明显的疼痛缓解(Mean difference -1.71;95%置信区间[CI] -2.44,-0.98;I2 = 70%;)。与类固醇注射组相比,ESWT组的功能预后显著改善(标准化平均差0.45;95% ci 0.27,0.63;I2=0%)和假对照组(SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.23,1.45;I2=91%),但与常规治疗组比较无显著差异。基于目前可获得的低确定性证据,由于广泛的临床多样性和纳入试验的不同治疗方案,ESWT与功能改善有关,并可能与足底筋膜炎疼痛减轻有关。需要从具有标准剂量和治疗方案的精心设计的研究中获得进一步的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
PP130 The Effectiveness Of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy For Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review And Meta-analysis
Introduction

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been used since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders, but there is considerable controversy regarding the effectiveness of ESWT. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to investigate the effectiveness of ESWT for plantar fasciitis.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted via electronic databases including MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled trials register, and 5 Korean databases from inception date to April 2022. Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted study data. Major outcomes were pain relief, function, and quality of life.

Results

We identified a total of 48 RCTs comparing ESWT with corticosteroid injection (n=14), conventional therapies (n=19), and sham control (n=21). Most studies included participants with chronic heel pain diagnosed as plantar fasciitis. All trials were susceptible to bias. In terms of pain results, ESWT showed no significant difference when compared with the steroid injection group and the conventional therapy group, and significant pain relief was confirmed only compared to the sham control group (Mean Difference -1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.44,-0.98; I2=70%;). Functional outcomes were significantly improved in the ESWT group compared to the steroid injection group (standardized mean difference 0.45; 95% CI 0.27,0.63; I2=0%) and the sham control group (SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.23,1.45; I2=91%), but no significant difference was found when compared to the conventional therapy group.

Conclusions

Based upon the currently available low certainty evidence because of wide clinical diversity and varying treatment protocols of included trials, ESWT is associated with improved function and may be associated with pain reduction in plantar fasciitis. Further evidence is needed from well-designed studies with a standard dose and treatment protocol.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
15.60%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care serves as a forum for the wide range of health policy makers and professionals interested in the economic, social, ethical, medical and public health implications of health technology. It covers the development, evaluation, diffusion and use of health technology, as well as its impact on the organization and management of health care systems and public health. In addition to general essays and research reports, regular columns on technology assessment reports and thematic sections are published.
×
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