A systematic review and meta-analysis on the use of diagnostic ultrasound in guiding corticosteroid injections for shoulder pain (subacromial/ subdeltoid bursa)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of diagnostic ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections in subacromial/subdeltoid bursa in the management of shoulder pain. Methods: The systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted from November 2023 to February 2024 in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines, and comprised search on Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Scopus and PubMed databases for randomised controlled and/or clinical trials involving adult patients with shoulder pain/subacromial impingement/bursitis, comparing ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections versus blind injections, and published in the English language between January 2003 and August 2023. Quality assessment was performed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale, and meta-analysis was performed using MedCalc software. RESULTS: Of the 72 full-text articles assessed, 11(15.3%) were analysed. There was a definite short-term effectiveness of ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections in reducing pain, as assessed by visual analogue scale scores (p <0.001 at 6 weeks; p<0.05 at 12 week and 33 week) and improved range of motion in flexion, abduction, internal and external rotation (p<0.001-0.05). While meta-analysis confirms significant pooled effects for pain scores and range of motion outcomes at 6 weeks, long-term efficacy remained inconclusive due to heterogeneity across studies and limited long-term follow-up research on the subject. Conclusion: Evidence supported short-term efficacy of ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections for shoulder pain management, but robust trials with extended followup periods and larger cohorts are needed to establish their long-term effectiveness.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.139 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".