A comparison of two different treatments with navigated extracorporeal shock-wave therapy for calcifying tendinitis – a randomized controlled trial

Sabeti, Manuel; Dorotka, Ronald; Göll, A.; Gruber, M.; Schatz, Klaus

doi:10.1007/s00508-006-0723-x

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… 2 14 2000 + − + − + + + − + + Tornese et al 68 + Epos Ultra (Dornier) EM 0.22 (?) 3 7 1800 + − + − − + + + + + Sabeti-Aschraf et al 69 + Modulith SLK (Storz) EM 0.08 (?) 3 7 1000 + + − − − + + + + 0.20 (?)…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for orthopedic conditions: a systematic review on studies listed in the PEDro database

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundExtracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is an effective and safe non-invasive treatment option for tendon and other pathologies of the musculoskeletal system.Sources of dataThis systematic review used data derived from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro; , 23 October 2015, date last accessed).Areas of agreementESWT is effective and safe. An optimum treatment protocol for ESWT appears to be three treatment sessions at 1-week intervals, with 2000 impulses per session and the highest energy flux density the patient can tolerate.Areas of controversyThe distinction between radial ESWT as ‘low-energy ESWT’ and focused ESWT as ‘high-energy ESWT’ is not correct and should be abandoned.Growing pointsThere is no scientific evidence in favour of either radial ESWT or focused ESWT with respect to treatment outcome.Areas timely for developing researchFuture randomized controlled trials should primarily address systematic tests of the aforementioned optimum treatment protocol and direct comparisons between radial and focused ESWT.

show abstract

Section: Resultsunclassified

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for orthopedic conditions: a systematic review on studies listed in the PEDro database

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sabeti et al 22 published results of a blinded, randomized, controlled trial of high-energy versus low-energy shock wave therapy in 50 patients. Forty-four patients completed the study and showed signifi cant improvement in VAS and CMS scores, but no signifi cant differences were found between groups.…”

Section: High-energy Versus Low-energy Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Focused Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Calcifying Tendinitis of the Shoulder: A Meta-Analysis

Vavken

Holinka

Rompe³

et al. 2009

Sports Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the management of calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder. Furthermore, a dose-response relationship was sought as a secondary confirmation of effectiveness.Hypothesis:Focused extracorporeal shock wave therapy has a high, dose-responsive effectiveness in the management of calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder.Study Design:Meta-analysis.Methods:Studies were identified from online databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register), manual searches, and personal communication with experts in the field. After assessment of heterogeneity, a random effects model was generated. The primary end points were identified as pain and function by using the visual analog scale and the Constant-Murley Score, respectively. These end points were pooled and the weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Odds ratios of the secondary end point deposit resorption were pooled.Results:In 14 studies, shock wave therapy led to a significantly higher reduction of pain (weighted mean difference, −2.8 points; 95% confidence interval, −4.2 to −1.5 points) and improvement of function (weighted mean difference, 19.8 points; 95% confidence interval, 13.4-26.3 points), compared to other treatments and placebo. High-energy treatment produced significantly better results than low-energy treatment for pain reduction (weighted mean difference, 1.7 points; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-2.6 points) and improvement of function (weighted mean difference, 10.7 points; 95% confidence interval, 7.2-14.1 points). These results are consistent with a dose-response relationship supporting the effectiveness of shock wave therapy.Conclusion:Shock wave therapy for calcifying tendinitis of the shoulder is effective in pain relief, function restoration, and deposit resorption; however, these conclusions are susceptible to bias arising from the limitations of the included studies.

show abstract

“…Several muscles contribute to the stability of the shoulder joint, and this set of muscles is called the rotator cuff, composed of four muscles and tendons (supraspinatus, infra-spinal, subscapularis and teres minor), which originate in the scapula and insert on the tuberosities of the humerus, being responsible for the movement and stability of the glenohumeral joint [4,6,31]. Thus, the excessive use these muscles can contribute to the formation of calcium deposits within the tendon, mainly affecting the tendon of the supraspinatus muscle [37].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of anthropometry on meat-packing plant workers: an approach to the shoulder joint

Reis

Peres

Tirloni

et al. 2012

Work

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted with 90 poultry slaughterhouse workers, which perform the function of removing chicken parts from the conveyor belt, and sample was composed of 66 women (33.5 ± 6.5 years) and 24 men (35.7 ± 7.2 years), aiming to analyze the influence of anthropometry in the shoulder joint of these workers. Body discomfort was evaluated by a human body diagram, being applied at the end of the work shift. The anthropometric measurement of shoulder was performed by measuring the height of the acromion process, being compared with the height of the conveyor belt. Analysis of the results was performed by descriptive statistics, mean, standard deviation, percentage and percentiles 5%, 50% and 95%. It was found that the height of the conveyor belt was 1.74 meters, while the average shoulder height of workers was 1.38 meters for percentile 5%, 1.41 meters for percentile 50% and 1.65 meters for percentile 95%. The discomfort regions were shoulder 45%, neck 29%, column 26%, arms 23%, and wrists and hand 20%. The upper limb assessment was performed with percentile 5% through the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment method, resulting in a final score > 7, indicating the need for adjustments of the work organization. It was concluded that the workplace does not meet the workers' anthropometric characteristics, mainly affecting the shoulder joint, and correction ergonomics becomes necessary so that the workers involved in this study can perform their functions with health, comfort and safety.

show abstract

A comparison of two different treatments with navigated extracorporeal shock-wave therapy for calcifying tendinitis – a randomized controlled trial

Cited by 17 publications

References 14 publications

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for orthopedic conditions: a systematic review on studies listed in the PEDro database

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for orthopedic conditions: a systematic review on studies listed in the PEDro database

Focused Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Calcifying Tendinitis of the Shoulder: A Meta-Analysis

Influence of anthropometry on meat-packing plant workers: an approach to the shoulder joint

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About