Skip to main content
. 2006 Oct 24;41(4):188–198. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2006.029769

Table 3 Results of included studies for clinical outcome measures. Incomplete data were not included.

Outcome measure Study ID Dx Intervention Wk WMD (95% CI) RR (95% CI) p Value
Pain
Pain VAS (100 mm) Silbernagel 200152 AT EE vs CE 6 2.00 (−18.90, 22.90) 0.85
12 18.00 (−3.68, 39.68) 0.10
26 10.00 (−8.81, 28.81) 0.30
Jonsson 200545 PT EE vs CE 12 44.80 (20.09, 69.51) 0.00004
Martinez‐Silvestrini 200546 LET EE+St vs CE+St 6 8.00 (−8.02, 24.02) 0.33
EE+St vs St
6 −1.00 (−16.46, 14.46) 0.90
Decrease in pain (Yes/No)* Stasinopoulos 200453 PT EE vs US 4 8.00 (1.21, 52.69) 0.03
8 21.00 (1.40, 315.98) 0.03
16 21.00 (1.40, 315.98) 0.03
EE vs F 4 4.00 (1.11, 14.35) 0.03
8 5.00 (1.45, 17.27) 0.01
16 5.00 (1.45, 17.27) 0.01
FAOS Pain Score (/100) Roos 200450 AT EE vs EE+Sp 12 1.40 (−19.16, 21.96) 0.89
52 4.00 (−15.01, 23.01) 0.68
EE vs Sp 12 14.00 (−6.56, 37.94) 0.18
52 4.00 (−14.11, 22.11) 0.67
Function
FAOS Sport/Rec score (/100) Roos 200450 AT EE vs EE+Sp 12 17.00 (−8.87, 42.87) 0.20
52 10.00 (−17.94, 37.94) 0.48
EE vs Sp 12 20.00 (−8.87, 45.87) 0.13
52 8.00 (−17.89, 33.89) 0.54
Plantarflexion (°) Silbernagel 200152 AT EE vs CE 12 2.00 (3.36, 7.36) 0.46
Jumping test (cm) Silbernagel 200152 AT EE vs CE 12 0.00 (−4.89, 4.89) 1.00
Toe raise Test (n) Silbernagel 200152 AT EE vs CE 12 −2.00 (−14.55, 10.55) 0.75
VISA scores (/100) Jonsson 200545 PT EE vs CE 12 45.90 (24.54, 67.26) <0.0001
Visnes 200555 PT EE vs C 12 0.10 (−14.38, 14.58) 0.99
Hamstring moment (Nm) Cannell 200157 PT EE vs CE 12 5.00 (−133.98, 143.98) 0.94
Quadriceps moment (Nm) Cannell 200157 PT EE vs CE 12 106.00 (−73.74, 285.74) 0.25
DASH (/100) Martinez‐Silvestrini 200546 LET EE vs CE 6 0.00 (−9.76, 9.76) 1.00
EE+St vs St 6 −3.00 (−12.71, 6.71) 0.54
Ko scores (/100) Selvanetti 200363 LET EE vs US 4 38.70 (29.75, 47.65) <0.00001
48 39.20 (30.32, 48.08) <0.00001
Grip strength (mmHg) Martinez‐Silvestrini 200546 LET EE vs CE 6 −3.00 (−13.10, 7.10) 0.56
EE+St vs St 6 −4.00 (−12.50, 4.50) 0.36
Satisfaction/ Return to activity
Neisen‐Vertommen 199259 AT EE vs CE 12 4.50 (0.63, 32.38) 0.14
Mafi 200127 AT EE vs CE 12 2.25 (1.25, 4.05) 0.007
Silbernagel 200152 AT EE vs CE >26 1.56 (0.73, 3.32) 0.25
Cannell 200157 PT EE vs CE 12 1.35 (0.81, 2.24) 0.25
Jonsson 200545 PT EE vs CE 12 17.27 (1.15, 260.07) 0.04
>26 17.27 (1.15, 260.07) 0.04
Svernlov 200154 LET EE vs St >26 1.06 (0.81, 1.39) 0.68
Selvanetti 200363 LET EE vs US >26 21.97 (3.17, 152.20) 0.002

AT, Achilles tendinopathy; C, control; CE, concentric exercise; CI, confidence interval; DASH, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand; DOS, duration of symptoms; Dx, diagnosis; F, frictions; FAOS, foot and ankle outcome score; EE, eccentric exercise; LET, lateral elbow tendinopathy; p, statistical significance; PT, patellar tendinopathy; RCT, randomised controlled trial; RR, relative risk; S, splint; St, stretching; US, ultrasound; VAS, visual analogue scale; VISA, Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment; WMD, weighted mean difference; Wk, week of data collection.

*Yes, much better /no pain; No, worse/no change/slightly better