ReviewQatar medical journal2026
The effect of dextrose prolotherapy on pain and functional outcomes in chronic shoulder pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Qatar medical journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Shoulder pain is a common musculoskeletal condition that substantially affects daily activities and work and imposes a considerable socioeconomic burden. Dextrose prolotherapy has been proposed as a regenerative intervention for musculoskeletal disorders, but previous reviews have primarily focused on specific shoulder conditions rather than chronic shoulder pain across different etiologies. This study evaluated the effects of dextrose prolotherapy on pain and functional outcomes in adults with chronic shoulder pain compared with control interventions. Methods: PubMed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library were searched on January 20, 2025. Three reviewers independently screened studies according to predefined eligibility criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and pooled effects were estimated using standardized mean differences (SMDs). Results: Among 585 identified records, 12 randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and seven were eligible for each quantitative synthesis. The overall pooled effect on pain was not statistically significant (SMD -0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.84 to 0.46). The pooled effect on functional outcomes was also not statistically significant (SMD -0.72; 95% CI, -1.85 to 0.41). Exploratory subgroup analysis suggested lower pain scores after repeated injections (at least three sessions; SMD -0.80; 95% CI, -1.26 to -0.35), whereas a single injection was associated with higher pain scores than control (SMD 0.60; 95% CI, 0.04 to 1.16). These subgroup findings were accompanied by substantial heterogeneity and were not derived from direct head-to-head comparisons. Conclusion: Current evidence does not demonstrate a statistically significant overall benefit of dextrose prolotherapy for pain or functional outcomes in chronic shoulder pain. Repeated injections may be associated with greater pain reduction than a single injection, but this exploratory finding requires confirmation in adequately powered, diagnosis-specific randomized trials using standardized injection protocols.
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.