Skip to main content
. 2018 Aug 2;19:278. doi: 10.1186/s12891-018-2204-6

Table 2.

Summary of included study characteristics

Study author (year) [reference] Groups Age (years)
Mean (SD)
Sex F/M N Design Diagnosis Involved side Unilateral/bilateral Athlete/nonathlete Duration of symptoms (months)
Mean (SD, range)
Cointervention Follow up time point Outcome results Fund or grant§ MQ score*
Chen (2014) [51] EG: ESWT + MSE 63.0 (7.4) 102/18 30 RCT, DB Popliteal cyamella NR Nonathlete 10–144 None Baseline VASb,c; ROMb,c Funded 7/10
CG 1: USD + MSE 30 Posttest: ≤1, 6 months Lequesne’s indexb,c
CG 2: MSE 30
CG 3: Non-ESWT 30
Geng (2017) [90] EG: ESWT + APT 35.9 (10.2) 19/41 30 RCT CPT NR Nonathlete 4.7 (2.8) None Baseline VASa,b,c; PTTa,b,c Funded 6/10
CG: CT 30 Posttest: 1 month 4-point Likert scalec
Guan (2015) [80] EG: ESWT 45.5 (20–80) 91/55 73 RCT PAT 128/18 Nonathlete 12.5 (6–36) None Baseline VASa,b,c NR 6/10
CG: CT 73 Posttest: 6 months
Huang (2017) [88] EG: ESWT 22.0 (3.0) 0/31 31 RCT CPT 28/3 Athlete 12.0 (6–24) None Baseline VASa,b,c; VISA-Pa,b,c Funded 6/10
CG: CT 21.0 (3.0) 0/30 30 29/1 11.0 (6–20) Posttest: 1, 3, 12 months 4-point Likert scalec
Jiang (2016) [81] EG: ESWT 35.7 (9.1) 24/16 40 RCT CPT 40/0 Nonathlete 4.2 (3.9) PT Baseline VASa,b,c; PIb,c NR 6/10
CG: Non-ESWT 34.4 (10.7) 21/15 36 36/0 4.7 (4.4) Pain medication Posttest: ≤1, 2 weeks KOS-ADLSa,b,c
Khosrawi (2017) [48] EG: ESWT 49.4 (7.8) 16/4 20 RCT, SB PAT NR Nonathlete > 3 months STE Baseline VASa,b,c; MPQa,b,c Funded 8/10
CG: Sham ESWT 50.2 (8.1) 15/5 20 Pain medication Posttest: ≤1, 2 months
Liu (2016) [82] EG: ESWT 22.1 (1.5) 22/28 50 RCT, SB CPT 50/0 Athlete 4.9 (1.3, 3–6) APT Baseline VASa,b,c; VISA-Pa,b,c Funded 6/10
CG: Iontophoresis 22.2 (1.3) 23/27 50 50/0 5.0 (1.1, 3–6) Massage Posttest: ≤1, 3, 6, 12 months 4-point RMSc
Taunton (2003) [83] EG: ESWT 23–52 5/5 10 RCT, SB CPT NR Athlete > 3 months None Baseline VISA-Pa,b,c Funded 5/10
CG: Sham ESWT 5/5 10 Posttest: ≤1, 3 months Vertical jump testb,c
Thijs (2017) [84] EG: ESWT 30.5 (8.0) 8/14 22 RCT, DB CPT NR Nonathlete 16.3 (18.2, 3–78) ET exercise Baseline VASa,b; VISA-Pa,b NR 9/10
CG: Sham ESWT 27.3 (5.2) 6/24 30 24.9 (31.6, 3–125) Posttest: ≤1, 3, 6 months 6-point Likert scale
Vetrano (2013) [85] EG: ESWT 26.8 (8.5) 6/17 23 RCT, SB CPT 23/0 Athlete 17.6 (20.2) STE Baseline VASa,b,c; VISA-Pa,b,c NR 7/10
CG: PRP 26.9 (9.1) 3/20 23 23/0 18.9 (19.1) Posttest: 2, 6, 12 months MBSa,b,c
Wang (2014) [86] EG: ESWT 28.3 (7.4) 5/21 26 RCT, SB ACL reconstruction 26/0 Nonathlete 21.4 (22.5, 1–72) PT Baseline LFSa,b,c Funded 8/10
CG: Non-ESWT 27.7 (7.7) 6/21 27 27/0 15.4 (21.9, 1–84) Posttest: 12, 24 months IKDC scorea,b
Weckström (2016) [52] EG: ESWT 23.7 (2.0) 6/14 11 RCT ITBS NR Nonathlete 60.4 (53.7) MSE Baseline 11-point NRSb; NR 7/10
CG: CT 24.2 (2.2) 7/13 13 42.3 (65.1) STE Posttest: 1, 2, 12 months Treadmill test
Wu (2009) [91] EG: ESWT 15.9 (11–19) 9/21 30 RCT OSD NR Athlete 3–36 None Baseline VASa,b,c; MPQa,b,c NR 6/10
CG: USD 16.5 (14.–19) 7/23 30 3–36 Posttest: 0, 3 months 3-point Likert scalec
Wu (2016) [89] EG: ESWT 26.0 (19–38) 7/55 31 RCT ACL injury 31/0 Nonathlete 3.8 (1–12) PT Baseline VASa,b,c NR 6/10
CG: Non-ESWT 31 31/0 Posttest: ≤1 month 4-point Likert scalec
Yang (2007) [16] EG: ESWT 34.0 (7.4) 6/22 28 RCT PTKS 28/0 Nonathlete 6.0 (5.3) MSE Baseline VASa,b,c; ROMa,b,c NR 5/10
CG: CPM 33.0 (8.4) 9/20 29 29/0 6.0 (3.3) Posttest: ≤1 month 4-point Likert scalec
Zhang (2016) [92] EG: ESWT 48.0 (4.6) 10/8 18 RCT, SB Traumatic synovitis 18/0 Nonathlete 1–2 APT; MSE Baseline VASa,b,c; ROMa,b,c; Funded 6/10
CG: Non-ESWT 50.0 (5.8) 11/7 18 18/0 1–2 Posttest: 2, 4, 6 weeks Swellinga,b,c; LFSa,b,c 4-point Likert scale
Zhang (2017) [17] EG: ESWT 34.8 (5.6) 7/21 28 RCT PTKS 28/0 Nonathlete 4.7 (2.3) PT Baseline VASa,b,c; ROMa,b,c; NR 6/10
CG: Non-ESWT 35.5 (4.9) 9/17 26 26/0 4.3 (2.6) Posttest: 0 month HSSa,b,c; 4-point Likert scale
Zhou (2015) [53] EG: ESWT 25.0 (18–30) 30/30 30 RCT IPFP injury 50/10 Athlete 24 (1–48) None Baseline VASa,b,c; NR 6/10
CG: APT 30 Posttest: ≤1 month 4-point Likert scalec
Zwerver (2011) [87] EG: ESWT 24.2 (5.2) 11/20 31 RCT, DB CPT 18/13 Athlete 7.3 (3.6) Sports participation Baseline VAS a,b; VISA-P a,b; Funded 9/10
CG: Sham ESWT 25.7 (4.5) 10/21 31 13/18 8.1 (3.8) Medical treatment Posttest: ≤1, 3, 6 months Knee-loading pain test

*Assessed using the 10-point PEDro classification scale

No application of shock wave treatment

Value of total sample

§Details of the funding information of the studies are presented in Additional file 10: Table S3

aSignificant improvements in the control group compared with baseline (P < 0.05)

bSignificant improvements in the experimental group compared with baseline (P < 0.05)

cSignificant between-group difference for ESWT compared with control (P < 0.05)

MQ methodological quality, EG experimental group, CG control group, ESWT extracorporeal shock wave therapy, RCT randomized controlled trial, QRCT Quasi-randomized controlled trial, DB double blind, VAS visual analog scale, NR not reported, ET eccentric training, VISA-P Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Patella, PRP platelet-rich plasma, PTKS posttraumatic knee stiffness, USD ultrasound diathermy, MSE muscular strengthening exercise, APT acupuncture therapy, LPNIR-LI linear polarized near-infrared light irradiation, CT conservative treatment, STE stretching exercise, ITBS iliotibial band syndrome, OSD Osgood–Schlatter disease, CPT chronic patellar tendinopathy, PTT patellar tendon thickness, PT physiotherapy, PAT pes anserine tendinopathy, MPQ McGill pain questionnaire, PI patellar intumesce, KOS-ADLS Knee Outcome Survey-activities of Daily Living Scale, ACL anterior cruciate ligament, LFS Lysholm functional score, MBS Modified Blazina scale, IKDC International Knee Documentation Committee, CPM continuous passive motion, LCSI local corticosteroid injection, HSS Hospital for Special Surgery Knee score, IPFP infrapatellar fat pad, ROM range of motion