Table 3

‚ÄÉResults for seven papers on treatment by extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT)

ReferenceNoMethod of treatmentOutcome measuresConclusionsQuality score (%)
Rompe et al35100ESWT v sham therapyPainESWT was more effective than sham therapy at the end of treatment and at the follow ups55
Function
Grip strength
Global improvement
Haake et al37271ESWT v sham therapyPainNo difference after the end of treatment and at the follow ups75
Function
Grip strength
Global improvement
Speed et al3675ESWT v sham therapyPainNo difference after the end of treatment and at the follow ups53
Global improvement
Crowther et al3873ESWT v steroid injectionPainInjection more effective than ESWT at the end of treatment and at the follow up56
Melikyan et al3974ESWT v sham therapyPainNo difference after the end of treatment and at the follow ups57
Function
Grip strength
Global improvement
Rompe et al4078ESWT v sham therapyPainESWT was more effective than sham therapy at the end of treatment and at the follow ups74
Function
Grip strength
Global improvement
Melegati et al4141Lateral ESWT technique v back ESWT techniquePainNo differences between the two techniques at the end of the treatment and at the follow up. Improvement for both from baseline45
Function
Global improvement