ArticleScientifica2018
Comparative Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided Intratendinous Prolotherapy Injection with Conventional Treatment to Treat Focal Supraspinatus Tendinosis.
Article in Scientifica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of dextrose prolotherapy on pain and functional outcomes in chronic shoulder pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Qatar medical journal · 2026Review
- Exploring dextrose prolotherapy in rotator cuff disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Comparative Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided Intratendinous Prolotherapy Injection with Conventional Treatment to Treat Focal Supraspinatus Tendinosis.Scientifica · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of dextrose prolotherapy injection for focal supraspinatus rotator cuff tendinosis via outcomes such as functional score, range of movement, and real-time ultrasound parameters. MATERIALS AND
methods12 adult patients with focal supraspinatus tendinosis recruited after they had less than 30% improvement in functional (DASH) scores after one month of physiotherapy following initial presentation. Seven patients had 0.5-1.0 ml of prolotherapy injection (12.5% dextrose, 0.5% lignocaine) injected into the area of focal tendinosis under ultrasound guidance. Meanwhile, five patients continued standard physiotherapy with no intervention performed. Regional area of echogenicity in decibels, DASH, range of movements of the shoulder, pain, and sleep scores were measured at baseline and at 12 weeks.
resultsThe prolotherapy group showed significant improvement in shoulder abduction (
conclusionUltrasound-guided intratendinous prolotherapy injection significantly improves patient's range of abduction and improves sleep within 12 weeks of treatment compared to conventional physiotherapy management.
trial registrationThis study was registered under Current Controlled Trials (UK) and given International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) of 43520960.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.