ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2023
Comparative effects of radial and focused extracorporeal shock wave therapies in coccydynia.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of focused extracorporeal shock wave versus manual therapy in postpartum patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction: a prospective clinical trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Trial
- Radial Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Refractory Coccygodynia.Journal of medical cases · 2025Article
- Management of coccygodynia: talking points from a systematic review of recent clinical trials.Annals of joint · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of physical therapy interventions for coccydynia: a systematic review with a narrative synthesis.Archives of physiotherapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study was conducted to compare the effects of radial and focused extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in patients with coccydynia. Patients and methods: In this prospective randomized double-blind study conducted between March 2021 and October 2021, 60 patients with coccydynia (50 males, 10 females; mean age: 35.9±12.0 years, range 18 to 65 years) were randomized into three groups (n=20) according to different wave types of ESWT: focused, radial, and sham. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used for pain assessment, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used for functional assessment in all patients before the treatment (baseline), after the completion of four sessions of treatment (fourth week), one month after the end of the treatment (eighth week), and three months after the end of the treatment (16 Results: The mean body mass index of the participants was 26.2±3.0. Compared to baseline, the VAS scores at four weeks were reduced only in the radial ESWT group (p<0.05). Compared to baseline, the VAS and ODI scores at eight and 16 weeks were significantly reduced in both the focused and radial ESWT groups (p<0.05 for all). The radial ESWT group was significantly superior to the focused ESWT group in the comparisons between the groups at four weeks in the VAS values and at 16 weeks in the ODI scores (p<0.05 for all). Conclusion: Radial and focused ESWT are both effective in treating coccydynia compared to sham ESWT. However, radial ESWT may be more effective in the treatment of coccydynia.
Indexed as
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.