Steroid injections for shoulder disorders: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials

Geert J.M.G. Van Der Heijden, Daniëlle A.W.M. Van Der Windt, Jos Kleijnen, Bart W. Koes, Lex M. Bouter

Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background. Patients with shoulder disorders are believed to benefit considerably from steroid injections. However, the controversy about their efficacy persists. Aim. The study was designed to assess the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders. Method. A systematic computerized literature search in Medline and Embase was conducted, supplemented with citation tracking of all relevant publications. Studies published before November 1995 were selected if steroid injections were randomly allocated to patients with shoulder disorders and when clinically relevant outcome measures were reported. Because the validity of study outcomes depends heavily on the strength of methodological quality, the methods were assessed systematically by two 'blinded' independent reviewers. This resulted in a method score (maximum 100 points) that was based on four categories: study population, interventions, measurement of effect, and data presentation and analysis. Confidence intervals for the differences between groups in success rates were calculated in order to summarize the efficacy of steroid injections. Results. Only three out of the 16 studies scored more than 50 points, indicating a generally poor quality of methods. Most studies reported small sample sizes. The flaws most often found were incomparability of co-interventions and poor blinding of therapist. The methods assessment was frequently hampered by incomplete information about randomization, prognostic comparability, compliance, outcome measures included, blinding of patients and blinding of outcome measurement. Conclusions. The evidence in favour of the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders is scarce. The methods of most studies appear to be of poor quality. The few studies that appear to be credible do not provide conclusive evidence about which patients at what time in the course of shoulder disorders benefit most from steroid injections.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)309-316
Number of pages8
JournalBritish Journal of General Practice
Volume46
Issue number406
Publication statusPublished - 1996

Fingerprint

Randomized Controlled Trials
Steroids
Injections
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Random Allocation
Sample Size
Compliance
Publications
Confidence Intervals
Population

Keywords

  • Injections
  • Randomized clinical trials
  • Shoulder
  • Steroids
  • Systematic review

Cite this

Van Der Heijden, G. J. M. G., Van Der Windt, D. A. W. M., Kleijnen, J., Koes, B. W., & Bouter, L. M. (1996). Steroid injections for shoulder disorders: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials. British Journal of General Practice, 46(406), 309-316.
Van Der Heijden, Geert J.M.G. ; Van Der Windt, Daniëlle A.W.M. ; Kleijnen, Jos ; Koes, Bart W. ; Bouter, Lex M. / Steroid injections for shoulder disorders : A systematic review of randomized clinical trials. In: British Journal of General Practice. 1996 ; Vol. 46, No. 406. pp. 309-316.
@article{ecbcaef6ee484958aa668d0d9cda8423,
title = "Steroid injections for shoulder disorders: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials",
abstract = "Background. Patients with shoulder disorders are believed to benefit considerably from steroid injections. However, the controversy about their efficacy persists. Aim. The study was designed to assess the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders. Method. A systematic computerized literature search in Medline and Embase was conducted, supplemented with citation tracking of all relevant publications. Studies published before November 1995 were selected if steroid injections were randomly allocated to patients with shoulder disorders and when clinically relevant outcome measures were reported. Because the validity of study outcomes depends heavily on the strength of methodological quality, the methods were assessed systematically by two 'blinded' independent reviewers. This resulted in a method score (maximum 100 points) that was based on four categories: study population, interventions, measurement of effect, and data presentation and analysis. Confidence intervals for the differences between groups in success rates were calculated in order to summarize the efficacy of steroid injections. Results. Only three out of the 16 studies scored more than 50 points, indicating a generally poor quality of methods. Most studies reported small sample sizes. The flaws most often found were incomparability of co-interventions and poor blinding of therapist. The methods assessment was frequently hampered by incomplete information about randomization, prognostic comparability, compliance, outcome measures included, blinding of patients and blinding of outcome measurement. Conclusions. The evidence in favour of the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders is scarce. The methods of most studies appear to be of poor quality. The few studies that appear to be credible do not provide conclusive evidence about which patients at what time in the course of shoulder disorders benefit most from steroid injections.",
keywords = "Injections, Randomized clinical trials, Shoulder, Steroids, Systematic review",
author = "{Van Der Heijden}, {Geert J.M.G.} and {Van Der Windt}, {Dani{\"e}lle A.W.M.} and Jos Kleijnen and Koes, {Bart W.} and Bouter, {Lex M.}",
year = "1996",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "309--316",
journal = "British Journal of General Practice",
issn = "0960-1643",
publisher = "Royal College of General Practitioners",
number = "406",

}

Van Der Heijden, GJMG, Van Der Windt, DAWM, Kleijnen, J, Koes, BW & Bouter, LM 1996, 'Steroid injections for shoulder disorders: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials' British Journal of General Practice, vol. 46, no. 406, pp. 309-316.

Steroid injections for shoulder disorders : A systematic review of randomized clinical trials. / Van Der Heijden, Geert J.M.G.; Van Der Windt, Daniëlle A.W.M.; Kleijnen, Jos; Koes, Bart W.; Bouter, Lex M.

In: British Journal of General Practice, Vol. 46, No. 406, 1996, p. 309-316.

Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Steroid injections for shoulder disorders

T2 - A systematic review of randomized clinical trials

AU - Van Der Heijden, Geert J.M.G.

AU - Van Der Windt, Daniëlle A.W.M.

AU - Kleijnen, Jos

AU - Koes, Bart W.

AU - Bouter, Lex M.

PY - 1996

Y1 - 1996

N2 - Background. Patients with shoulder disorders are believed to benefit considerably from steroid injections. However, the controversy about their efficacy persists. Aim. The study was designed to assess the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders. Method. A systematic computerized literature search in Medline and Embase was conducted, supplemented with citation tracking of all relevant publications. Studies published before November 1995 were selected if steroid injections were randomly allocated to patients with shoulder disorders and when clinically relevant outcome measures were reported. Because the validity of study outcomes depends heavily on the strength of methodological quality, the methods were assessed systematically by two 'blinded' independent reviewers. This resulted in a method score (maximum 100 points) that was based on four categories: study population, interventions, measurement of effect, and data presentation and analysis. Confidence intervals for the differences between groups in success rates were calculated in order to summarize the efficacy of steroid injections. Results. Only three out of the 16 studies scored more than 50 points, indicating a generally poor quality of methods. Most studies reported small sample sizes. The flaws most often found were incomparability of co-interventions and poor blinding of therapist. The methods assessment was frequently hampered by incomplete information about randomization, prognostic comparability, compliance, outcome measures included, blinding of patients and blinding of outcome measurement. Conclusions. The evidence in favour of the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders is scarce. The methods of most studies appear to be of poor quality. The few studies that appear to be credible do not provide conclusive evidence about which patients at what time in the course of shoulder disorders benefit most from steroid injections.

AB - Background. Patients with shoulder disorders are believed to benefit considerably from steroid injections. However, the controversy about their efficacy persists. Aim. The study was designed to assess the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders. Method. A systematic computerized literature search in Medline and Embase was conducted, supplemented with citation tracking of all relevant publications. Studies published before November 1995 were selected if steroid injections were randomly allocated to patients with shoulder disorders and when clinically relevant outcome measures were reported. Because the validity of study outcomes depends heavily on the strength of methodological quality, the methods were assessed systematically by two 'blinded' independent reviewers. This resulted in a method score (maximum 100 points) that was based on four categories: study population, interventions, measurement of effect, and data presentation and analysis. Confidence intervals for the differences between groups in success rates were calculated in order to summarize the efficacy of steroid injections. Results. Only three out of the 16 studies scored more than 50 points, indicating a generally poor quality of methods. Most studies reported small sample sizes. The flaws most often found were incomparability of co-interventions and poor blinding of therapist. The methods assessment was frequently hampered by incomplete information about randomization, prognostic comparability, compliance, outcome measures included, blinding of patients and blinding of outcome measurement. Conclusions. The evidence in favour of the efficacy of steroid injections for shoulder disorders is scarce. The methods of most studies appear to be of poor quality. The few studies that appear to be credible do not provide conclusive evidence about which patients at what time in the course of shoulder disorders benefit most from steroid injections.

KW - Injections

KW - Randomized clinical trials

KW - Shoulder

KW - Steroids

KW - Systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029934372&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029934372&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

VL - 46

SP - 309

EP - 316

JO - British Journal of General Practice

JF - British Journal of General Practice

SN - 0960-1643

IS - 406

ER -