Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 448

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Review of Therapeutic Ultrasound: Effectiveness Studies

Open access
Robertson, Valma J, Baker, Kerry G·2001·Physical Therapy

Abstract

Background and Purpose. Therapeutic ultrasound is one of the most widely and frequently used electrophysical agents. Despite over 60 years of clinical use, the effectiveness of ultrasound for treating people with pain, musculoskeletal injuries, and soft tissue lesions remains questionable. This article presents a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which ultrasound was used to treat people with those conditions. Each trial was designed to investigate the contributions of active and placebo ultrasound to the patient outcomes measured. Depending on the condition, ultrasound (active and placebo) was used alone or in conjunction with other interventions in a manner designed to identify its contribution and distinguish it from those of other interventions. Methods. Thirty-five English-language RCTs were published between 1975 and 1999. Each RCT identified was scrutinized for patient outcomes and methodological adequacy. Results. Ten of the 35 RCTs were judged to have acceptable methods using criteria based on those developed by Sackett et al. Of these RCTs, the results of 2 trials suggest that therapeutic ultrasound is more effective in treating some clinical problems (carpal tunnel syndrome and calcific tendinitis of the shoulder) than placebo ultrasound, and the results of 8 trials suggest that it is not. Discussion and Conclusion. There was little evidence that active therapeutic ultrasound is more effective than placebo ultrasound for treating people with pain or a range of musculoskeletal injuries or for promoting soft tissue healing. The few studies deemed to have adequate methods examined a wide range of patient problems. The dosages used in these studies varied considerably, often for no discernable reason.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ptj/81.7.1339

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 37 references

Metadata

Authors
Robertson, V. J., & Baker, K. G.
Venue
Physical Therapy
Published
2001-07-01
Volume
81
Issue
7
Pages
1339-1350
ISSN
  • 0031-9023 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-6724
OpenAlex
W2146831361
Cited by
448
References
37
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Review of Therapeutic Ultrasound: Effectiveness Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/ptj/81.7.1339
The paper
Robertson, V. J., & Baker, K. G. (2001). A Review of Therapeutic Ultrasound: Effectiveness Studies. Physical Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/81.7.1339

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.