Focused extracorporeal shock wave therapy combined with supervised eccentric training for supraspinatus calcific tendinopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is effective in reducing shoulder pain and improving function in calcific supraspinatus tendinopathy. Eccentric exercise has been introduced as an effective treatment choice for Achilles tendinopathy, but poor evidence exists about its role in the treatment of rotator cuff tendinopathy. AIM: To investigate if adding a supervised eccentric training of the shoulder abductor muscles could improve the outcome of ESWT. DESIGN: Pre-post intervention pilot study with matched control-group. SETTING: Outpatient, University Hospital. POPULATION: Twenty-two subjects affected by painful supraspinatus calcific tendinopathy. METHODS: The study-group was assigned to receive focal ESWT (f-ESWT) plus a supervised eccentric training (SET) of the shoulder abductor muscles. The matched control-group received f-ESWT only. The post-treatment assessment at follow-up (T1) was performed nine weeks after the enrollment (T0). We assessed shoulder pain and function by the means of a numeric rating scale (p-NRS) and a DASH scale. As secondary outcome, we measured the isometric strength of the abductor muscles of the affected shoulder using a handheld dynamometer. RESULTS: At T1, we recorded a significant decrease in pain (P<0.001) and an improvement in upper limb function (P<0.001) in both groups. However, we observed no statistical differences in favor of the study-group, in terms of p-NRS and DASH total score. A mild increase (+13% from baseline) of the maximum isometric abduction strength was noticed in the study group at T1. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings did not support the hypothesis that adding a supervised eccentric training of the shoulder abductor muscles could improve the outcome (pain and function) of shock wave therapy. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Our study confirmed that f-ESWT is effective in reducing shoulder pain and improving function in calcific supraspinatus tendinopathy. Adding a supervised eccentric training, focused on the abductor muscles, was useful to improve maximum isometric abduction strength, but appeared to give no advantage in the short-term outcome of shock wave therapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".