The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Efficacy and safety of steroid injections for shoulder and elbow tendonitis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of steroid injections for patients with tendonitis of the shoulder or elbow. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature using PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and manual searches was performed until April 2008. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy on pain or functional disability, and/or the safety of steroid injections, versus placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or physiotherapy in patients with tendonitis were selected. Pooled effect size (ES) was calculated by meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: In all, 20 RCTs were analysed (744 patients treated by injections and 987 patients treated by controls; 618 shoulders and 1113 elbows). The pooled analysis indicated only short-term effectiveness of steroids versus the pooled controls for pain and function (eg, pain at week 1-3 ES = 1.18 (95% CI 0.27 to 2.09), pain at week 4-8 ES = 1.30 (95% CI 0.55 to 2.04), pain at week 12-24 ES = -0.38 (95% CI -0.85 to 0.08) and pain at week 48 ES = 0.07 (95% CI -0.60 to 0.75)). Sensitivity analyses indicated similar results whatever the localisation, type of steroid and type of comparator except for NSAIDs: steroid injections were not significantly better than NSAIDs in the short-term. Steroid injections appeared more effective than pooled other treatments in acute or subacute tendonitis. The main side effects were transient pain after injection (10.7% of corticosteroid injections) and skin modification (4.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Steroid injections are well tolerated and more effective for tendonitis in the short-term than pooled other treatments, though similar to NSAIDs. No long-term benefit was shown.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of Treatment
Laupacis, A., Sackett, D. L., & Roberts, R. S. (1988) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm198806303182605 · Cited by 1,681
Cited by
Dadgostar, H., Fahimipour, F., Pahlevan Sabagh, A., Arasteh, P., & Razi, M. (2021) · Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research · doi:10.1186/s13018-021-02470-x · Cited by 64
Stem Cell Treatment for Ligament Repair and Reconstruction
Hevesi, M., LaPrade, M., Saris, D. B. F., & Krych, A. J. (2019) · Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12178-019-09580-4 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Gaujoux-Viala, C., Dougados, M., & Gossec, L.
- Venue
- Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 68
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1843-1849
- ISSN
- 0003-4967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2170697272
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Efficacy and safety of steroid injections for shoulder and elbow tendonitis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/ard.2008.099572
- The paper
- Gaujoux-Viala, C., Dougados, M., & Gossec, L. (2009). Efficacy and safety of steroid injections for shoulder and elbow tendonitis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2008.099572
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.