Effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy in patients with tennis elbow: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Two pages on PainSci cite Zheng 2020: 1. Tennis Elbow Guide 2. Does Ultrasound or Shockwave Therapy Work?
original abstract †Abstracts here may not perfectly match originals, for a variety of technical and practical reasons. Some abstacts are truncated for my purposes here, if they are particularly long-winded and unhelpful. I occasionally add clarifying notes. And I make some minor corrections.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of Extracorporeal Shock Wave (ECSW) in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) of humerus.
HYPOTHESIS: ECSW therapy in people with LE effectively reduces the pain and gains functional rehabilitation.
MATERIALS/METHODS: Databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to April 2020 was searched to identify all relevant RCTs comparing ECSW therapy with any other conservative treatment, including injection and local anesthetic versus placebo or control in patients aged 18 with LE. The primary outcome is the mean overall pain score at 12 weeks after treatment. Another secondary outcome mainly included Thomsen test, 50% pain reduction, grip strength and adverse effect at 12 weeks after treatment.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with the placebo group, ECSW cannot significantly reduce the pain score (mean deviation [MD] = -4.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -8.78 to 0.32, P = .07), but make more people acquire 50% pain reduction (MD = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.75, P = .008). There was no significant difference between ECSW and control in decreasing the pain score of Thomsen test (MD = -3.22, 95% CI: -14.06 to 7.62, P = .56). ECSW was more effective in Grip strength as compared with control at 12 weeks-3 months (MD = 3.52, 95% CI: 2.43 to 4.60, P < .00001) CONCLUSIONS:: Results suggested that ECSW cannot effectively reduce the mean overall pain, but it showed more people acquire 50% pain reduction and might be a better option for the treatment of LE. Because of study limitations, additional high level of evidence, more rigorously designed large-samples and high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to guide clinical practice.
This page is part of the PainScience BIBLIOGRAPHY, which contains plain language summaries of thousands of scientific papers & others sources. It’s like a highly specialized blog. A few highlights:
- Common interventional procedures for chronic non-cancer spine pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials. Wang 2025 BMJ.
- Gabapentinoids and Risk of Hip Fracture. Leung 2024 JAMA Netw Open.
- Classical Conditioning Fails to Elicit Allodynia in an Experimental Study with Healthy Humans. Madden 2017 Pain Med.
- Topical glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) and eccentric exercises in the treatment of mid-portion achilles tendinopathy (the NEAT trial): a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Kirwan 2024 Br J Sports Med.
- Placebo analgesia in physical and psychological interventions: Systematic review and meta-analysis of three-armed trials. Hohenschurz-Schmidt 2024 Eur J Pain.