Table 1

Overview of GRADE results for group comparisons concerning intervention with physical resources

OutcomesIntervention×comparison interventionTrialsEffect size for intervention groupNo. of participants
(studies)
Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)
Result
Pain
Laser×placebo laserAbrisham et al56
Dogan et al58
Eslamian et al28
Sauders59
Vecchio et al60
Yeldan et al61
From 1.22 to 5.63301
(six studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate*
due to indirectness
No additional benefit from laser therapy
Laser associated with exercises×exercisesBal et al57
Calis et al64
Otadi et al55
From 0.93 to 0.95117
(three studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No additional benefit from laser therapy
Laser associated with exercises×ultrasound associated with exercisesCalis et al64
Yavuz et al62
From 0.95 to 1.2867
(two studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No additional benefit from laser or ultrasound therapy
PEMF×placebo PEMFAktas et al65
Binder et al66
Galace de Freitas et al30
Galace de Freitas et al52
Chard et al67
From 0.91 to 2.11230
(five studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊕
high
No difference between groups
Ultrasound×placebo ultrasoundGiombini et al29
Nykanen et al68
From 0.55 to 1.1295
(two studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No difference between groups
Microwave diathermy×placebo diathermyGiombini et al29
Akyol et al69
From 3.40 to 5.5265
(two studies)
⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low*†‡
due to inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision
No difference between groups
Function
Laser×placebo laserDogan et al58
Eslamian et al28
Vecchio et al60 Yeldan et al61
From 0.77 to 2.26197
(four studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊕
high
No difference between groups
Laser associated with exercises×exercisesBal et al57
Calis et al64
Otadi et al55
From 0.53 to 2.15117
(three studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No additional benefit from laser therapy
Laser associated with exercises×ultrasound associated with exercisesCalis et al64
Yavuz et al63
From 0.53 to 1.9867
(two studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No additional benefit from laser or ultrasound therapy
PEMF×placebo PEMFAktas et al65
Galace de Freitas et al30
Galace de Freitas et al52
From 0.81 to 1.74197
(three studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No difference between groups
Ultrasound×placebo ultrasoundGiombini et al29
Nykanen et al68
From 0.36 to 0.6095
(two studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to imprecision
No difference between groups
Microwave diathermy×placebo diathermyGiombini et al29
Akyol et al69
From 4.79 to 20.0065
(two studies)
⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low*†‡
due to inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision
No difference between groups
Range of motion, flexion
Laser×placebo laserAbrisham et al56
Dogan et al58
Yeldan et al61
From 0.44 to 7.00192
(three studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate
due to inconsistency
No difference between groups
Range of motion, abduction
Laser×placebo laserAbrisham et al56
Dogan et al58
Eslamian et al28
Yeldan et al61
From 0.57 to 6.11242
(four studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊕
high
No difference between groups
Range of motion, external rotation
Laser×placebo laserAbrisham et al56
Dogan et al58
Eslamian et al28
Yeldan et al61
From 0.09 to 4.09242
(four studies)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
low
due to inconsistency
No difference between groups
  • *Indirectness: there was clinical heterogeneity between trials.

  • †Imprecision: there was sparse data with <200 participants for the comparison.

  • ‡Inconsistency: there was statistical or effect size heterogeneity between trials.

  • Bold terms refer to the level of evidence according to GRADE.