Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar 3;3(3):CD008579.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008579.pub4.

Ultrasound and shockwave therapy for acute fractures in adults

Henry KC Searle  1   2   3 , Sharon R Lewis  4 , Conor Coyle  3 , Matthew Welch  5 , Xavier L Griffin  6
Affiliations

Ultrasound and shockwave therapy for acute fractures in adults

Henry KC Searle et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: The morbidity and socioeconomic costs of fractures are considerable. The length of time to healing is an important factor in determining a person's recovery after a fracture. Ultrasound may have a therapeutic role in reducing the time to union after fracture by stimulating osteoblasts and other bone-forming proteins. This is an update of a review previously published in February 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of low-intensity ultrasound (LIPUS), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFUS) and extracorporeal shockwave therapies (ECSW) as part of the treatment of acute fractures in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase (1980 to March 2022), Orthopaedic Proceedings, trial registers and reference lists of articles.

Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs including participants over 18 years of age with acute fractures (complete or stress fractures) treated with either LIPUS, HIFUS or ECSW versus a control or placebo-control.

Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodology expected by Cochrane. We collected data for the following critical outcomes: participant-reported quality of life, quantitative functional improvement, time to return to normal activities, time to fracture union, pain, delayed or non-union of fracture. We also collected data for treatment-related adverse events. We collected data in the short term (up to three months after surgery) and in the medium term (later than three months after surgery). MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 studies, involving 1543 fractures in 1517 participants; two studies were quasi-RCTs. Twenty studies tested LIPUS and one trial tested ECSW; no studies tested HIFUS. Four studies did not report any of the critical outcomes. All studies had unclear or high risk of bias in at least one domain. The certainty of the evidence was downgraded for imprecision, risk of bias and inconsistency. LIPUS versus control (20 studies, 1459 participants) We found very low-certainty evidence for the effect of LIPUS on Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured by SF-36 at up to one year after surgery for lower limb fractures (mean difference (MD) 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.85 to 3.97, favours LIPUS; 3 studies, 393 participants). This result was compatible with a clinically important difference of 3 units with both LIPUS or control. There may be little to no difference in time to return to work after people had complete fractures of the upper or lower limbs (MD 1.96 days, 95% CI -2.13 to 6.04, favours control; 2 studies, 370 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in delayed union or non-union up to 12 months after surgery (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.09, favours control; 7 studies, 746 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Although data for delayed and non-union included both upper and lower limbs, we noted that there were no incidences of delayed or non-union in upper limb fractures. We did not pool data for time to fracture union (11 studies, 887 participants; very low-certainty evidence) because of substantial statistical heterogeneity which we could not explain. In upper limb fractures, MDs ranged from 0.32 to 40 fewer days to fracture union with LIPUS. In lower limb fractures, MDs ranged from 88 fewer days to 30 more days to fracture union. We also did not pool data for pain experienced at one month after surgery in people with upper limb fractures (2 studies, 148 participants; very low-certainty evidence) because of substantial unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Using a 10-point visual analogue scale, one study reported less pain with LIPUS (MD -1.7, 95% CI -3.03 to -0.37; 47 participants), and the effect was less precise in the other study (MD -0.4, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.53; 101 participants). We found little or no difference in skin irritation (a possible treatment-related adverse event) between groups but judged the certainty of the evidence from this small study to be very low (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.65; 1 study, 101 participants). No studies reported data for functional recovery. Data for treatment adherence were inconsistently reported across studies, but was generally described to be good. Data for costs were reported for one study, with higher direct costs, as well as combined direct and indirect costs, for LIPUS use. ECSW versus control (1 study, 56 participants) We are uncertain whether ECSW reduces pain at 12 months after surgery in fractures of the lower limb (MD -0.62, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.27, favours ECSW); the difference between pain scores was unlikely to be clinically important, and the certainty of the evidence was very low. We are also uncertain of the effect of ECSW on delayed or non-union at 12 months because the certainty of this evidence is very low (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.01; 1 study, 57 participants). There were no treatment-related adverse events. This study reported no data for HRQoL, functional recovery, time to return to normal activities, or time to fracture union. In addition, no data were available for adherence or cost.

Authors' conclusions: We were uncertain of the effectiveness of ultrasound and shock wave therapy for acute fractures in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS), for which few studies reported data. It is probable that LIPUS makes little or no difference to delayed union or non-union. Future trials should be double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials recording validated PROMs and following up all trial participants. Whilst time to union is difficult to measure, the proportion of participants achieving clinical and radiographic union at each follow-up point should be ascertained, alongside adherence with the study protocol and cost of treatment in order to better inform clinical practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

HS: none known

SL (review author and Deputy Co‐ordinating Editor of the Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma group): none known. SL was not involved in the editorial process

CC: none known

MW: none known

XG: (guarantor and Co‐ordinating Editor of the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group): co‐editor of Trauma & Orthopaedics Group. His institution receives funds for his expert consultancy with several companies; none involve the development of ultrasound or shockwave therapy for acute fractures in adults. XG was not involved in the editorial process

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram
2
2
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study (Empty cells = not applicable as no participant‐reported outcomes in study)
3
3
Funnel plot for Analysis 1.5 Time to fracture union
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 1: Health‐related quality of life (lower limb)
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 2: Time to return to work complete fractures (days)
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 3: Time to return to normal activities (days)
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 4: Time to return to training/duty after stress fracture (days)
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 5: Time to fracture union (days)
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 6: Pain (short‐term)
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 7: Pain scores (medium‐term)
1.8
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 8: Delayed or non‐union (short‐term)
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 9: Delayed or non‐union (medium‐term)
1.10
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1: LIPUS versus control, Outcome 10: Adverse events
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: ECSW versus control, Outcome 1: Pain (VAS: 0 no pain to 10 severe pain)
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2: ECSW versus control, Outcome 2: Delayed or non‐union (medium‐term)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Busse 2014 {published data only}
    1. Busse J. TRUST pilot data [personal communication]. Email to: J Busse 30 October 2022.
    1. Busse JW, Bhandari M, Einhorn TA, Heckman JD, Leung K-S, Schemitsch E, et al. Trial to re-evaluate ultrasound in the treatment of tibial fractures (TRUST): a multicenter randomized pilot study. Trials 2014;15(206):1-8. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Busse 2016 {published data only}
    1. Busse J. Time to return original data [personal communication]. Email to: J Busse 3 November 2021.
    1. Busse JW, Bhandari M, Einhorn TA, Schemitsch E, Heckman JD, Tornetta P, et al. Re-evaluation of low intensity pulsed ultrasound in treatment of tibial fractures (TRUST): randomized clinical trial. BMJ 2016;355:1-7. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
    1. NCT00667849. Trial to evaluate ultraSound in the treatment of tibial fractures (TRUST). clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00667849 (first received 28 April 2008).
Emami 1999 {published data only}
    1. Emami A, Petren-Mallmin M, Larsson S. No effect of low-intensity ultrasound on healing time of intramedullary fixed tibial fractures. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 1999;13(4):252-7. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Gan 2014 {published data only}
    1. Gan TY, Kuah D, Graham KS, Markson G. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in lower limb bone stress injuries: a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine 2014;24(6):457-60. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Gopalan 2020 {published data only}
    1. CTRI/2016/11/007467. Evaluation of efficacy of low intensity pulsed ultrasound in facilitating mandibular fracture healing – a single blinded randomized controlled clinical trial. ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/pdf_generate.php?trialid=15408&EncHid=&am... (first received 16 November 2016).
    1. Gopalan A, Panneerselvam E, Doss GT, Ponvel K, Raja K. Evaluation of efficacy of low intensity pulsed ultrasound in facilitating mandibular fracture healing - a blinded randomized controlled clinical trial. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2020;78(6):997.E1-997.E7. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Handolin 2005 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}
    1. Handolin L, Kiljunen V, Arnala I, Kiuru MJ, Pajarinen J, Partio EK, et al. No long-term effects of ultrasound therapy on bioabsorbable screw-fixed lateral malleolar fracture. Scandinavian Journal of Surgery 2005;94(3):239-42. [PMID: ] - PubMed
    1. Handolin L, Kiljunen V, Arnala I, Pajarinen J, Partio EK, Rokkanen P. The effect of low intensity ultrasound and bioabsorbable self-reinforced poly-L-lactide screw fixation on bone in lateral malleolar fractures. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2005;125(5):317-21. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Handolin 2005a {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}
    1. Handolin L, Kiljunen V, Arnala I, Kiuru M, Pajarinen J, Partio E, et al. The effects of low-intensity ultrasound on 22 bioabrorbable self-reinforced poly-L-lactic acid (SR-PLLA) screw fixed lateral malleolar fracture. Suomen Ortopedia ja Traumatologia 2004;27(4):236-8.
    1. Handolin L, Kiljunen V, Arnala I, Kiuru MJ, Pajarinen J, Partio EK, et al. Effect of ultrasound therapy on bone healing of lateral malleolar fractures of the ankle joint fixed with bioabsorbable screws. Journal of Orthopaedic Science 2005;10(4):391-5. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Heckman 1994 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Cook S, Ryaby JP, Heckmann JD, Kristiansen TK. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates tibia and distal radius fracture healing in smokers. Hefte zur der Unfallchirurg 1996;262:336.
    1. Cook SD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Heckman JD, Kristiansen TK. Acceleration of tibia and distal radius fracture healing in patients who smoke. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research 1997;337:198-207. [PMID: ] - PubMed
    1. Cook SD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Heckman JD, Kristiansen TK. Low intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates tibia and distal radius fracture healing in smokers [abstract]. Orthopaedic Transactions 1996;20(1):56.
    1. Heckman JD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Kilcoyne RF. Acceleration of tibial fracture-healing by non-invasive, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American Volume 1994;76(1):26-34. [PMID: ] - PubMed
    1. Heckman JD. Further details of study data [personal communication]. Email to: JD Heckman 2 September 2010.
Kamath 2020 {published data only}
    1. Kamath JB, Jayasheelan N, Reddy B, Muhammed S, Savur A. The effect of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound therapyon fracture healing. Muller Journal of Medical Sciences and Research 2015;6(1):49-53.
Kristiansen 1997 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Cook S, Ryaby JP, Heckmann HD, Kristiansen TK. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates tibia and distal radius fracture healing in smokers. Hefte zur der Unfallchirurg 1996;262:336.
    1. Cook SD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Heckman JD, Kristiansen TK. Acceleration of tibia and distal radius fracture healing in patients who smoke. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1997;337:198-207. - PubMed
    1. Cook SD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Heckman JD, Kristiansen TK. Low intensity pulsed ultrasound accelerates tibia and distal radius fracture healing in smokers [abstract]. Orthopaedic Transactions 1996;20(1):56.
    1. Kristiansen TK, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey J. Controlling loss of reduction in distal radius fractures in an randomized, double-blind study using low-intensity ultrasound. In: Hefte zur der Unfallchirurg. Vol. 262. 1996:369.
    1. Kristiansen TK, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey J. Controlling loss of reduction in distal radius fractures with low intensity pulsed ultrasound [abstract]. Orthopaedic Transactions 1997;21(1):141.
Leung 2004 {published data only}
    1. Leung KS, Lee WS, Tsui HF, Liu PP, Cheung WH. Complex tibial fracture outcomes following treatment with low-intensity pulsed ultrasound. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology 2004;30(3):389-95. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Liu 2014 {published data only}
    1. LiuI Y, WeiII X, KuangIII Y, ZhengIV Y, GuV X, ZhanVI H, et al. Ultrasound treatment for accelerating fracture healing of the distal radius. A control study. Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira 2014;29(11):765-70. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Lubbert 2008 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Lubbert PH, Rijt RH, Hoorntje LE, Werken C. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) in fresh clavicle fractures: a multi-centre double blind randomised controlled trial. Injury 2008;39(12):1444-52. [PMID: ] - PubMed
    1. Lubbert PH. Further details of study data [personal communication]. Email to: PH Lubbert 7 November 2010.
Mayr 2000 {published data only}
    1. Mayr E, Rudzki M, Borchardt B, Ruter A. Accelerated healing of scaphoid fractures - a randomized study [abstract]. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 1999;13(4):310.
    1. Mayr E, Rudzki M-M, Rudzki M, Borchardt B, Hausser H, Ruter A. Does pulsed low-Intensity ultrasound accelerate healing of scaphoid fractures? [Beschleunigt niedrig intensive, gepulster Ultraschall die Heilung von Skaphoidfrakturen?]. Handchirurgie Mikrochirurgie Plastische Chirurgie 2000;32(2):115-22. - PubMed
    1. Mayr E. Accelerated healing of scaphoid fracture - a randomized study [abstract]. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume 1999;81 (Suppl 2):206.
Patel 2015 {published data only}
    1. Patel K, Kumar S, Kathiriya N, Madan S, Shah A, Venkataraghavan K, et al. An evaluation of the effect of therapeutic ultrasound on healing of mandibular fracture. Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction 2015;8(4):299-306. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Rue 2004 {published data only}
    1. Rue JP, Armstrong DW 3rd, Frassica FJ, Deafenbaugh M, Wilckens JH. The effect of pulsed ultrasound in the treatment of tibial stress fractures. Orthopedics 2004;27(11):1192-5. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Santana‐Rodríguez 2019 {published data only}
    1. researchregistry1928. Clinical assessment of the effect of pulsed ultrasounds on rib fractures healing. researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/5841d7... (first received 2 December 2016).
    1. Santana-Rodríguez, N, Clavo, B, Llontop P, Fiuza MD, Calatayud-Gastardi J, López D, et al. Pulsed ultrasounds reduce pain and disability, increasing rib fracture healing, in a randomized controlled trial. Pain Medicine 2019;20(10):1980-8. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Seifert 2013 {unpublished data only}ISRCTN90844675
    1. Seifert J. Original data in trial [personal communication]. Email to: J Seifert 30 October 2013.
    1. Seifert J. Original trail data [personal communication]. Email to: J Seifert 24 January 2021.
    1. Seifert J. Pulsed ultrasound to speed-up healing after intramedullary nailing of tibia fractures (PUSH-IT). controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN90844675/ISRCTN90844675 (accessed 9 December 2011).
Strauss 1999 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}
    1. Strauss E, McCabe J. Treatment of Jones fractures of the foot with adjunctive use of pulsed low-intensity ultrasound stimulation [abstract]. In: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting; 1998 Mar 13-14; New Orleans. 1998.
    1. Strauss E, Ryaby JP, McCabe J. Treatment of Jones' fractures of the foot with adjunctive use of low-pulsed ultrasound stimulation. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 1999;13(4):310.
Wang 2007 {published data only}
    1. Liu HC, Fu TH. Effects of shockwave on acute high-energy fractures of the femur and tibia [abstract]. In: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting; 2007 Feb 14–18; San Diego. 2007.
    1. Wang CJ, Liu HC, Fu TH. The effects of extracorporeal shockwave on acute high-energy long bone fractures of the lower extremity. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2007;127(2):137-42. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Yadav 2008 {published data only}
    1. Yadav YK, Salgotra KR, Banerjee A. Role of ultrasound therapy in the healing of tibial stress fractures. Medical Journal Armed Forces India 2008;64(3):234-6. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

KCT0004227 {published data only}
    1. KCT0004227. A single-site, double-blind, randomized study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fracture treatment after using a low-intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulator (LIPUS, SMARTSOL ™) in fracture patients. cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do?seq=14212&search_page=L&a... (first received 17 July 2019).
NCT04120662 {unpublished data only}
    1. NCT04120662. Effectiveness of shockwave treatment for proximal fifth metatarsal stress fracture in soccer players. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04120662 (first received 9 October 2019).
NCT04518956 {published data only}
    1. NCT04518956. Shockwave therapy versus LIPUS on mandibular fracture bone healing. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04518956 (first received 19 August 2020).
PACTR201909505821864 {published data only}
    1. PACTR201909505821864. Efficacy of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in healing of lower limb fractures. pactr.samrc.ac.za/TrialDisplay.aspx?TrialID=9390 (first received 1 January 2017).
    1. PACTR201909505821864. Efficacy of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in healing of lower limb fractures. trialsearch.who.int/?TrialID=PACTR201909505821864 (first received 11 September 2019).

References to ongoing studies

KCT0002591 {published data only}
    1. KCT0002591. Ultrasound stimulating treatment for intertrochanteric fracture. cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do?seq=9426&search_page=L&am... (first received 19 September 2020).

Additional references

Aaron 2004
    1. Aaron RK, Ciombor DM, Simon BJ. Treatment of nonunions with electric and electromagnetic fields. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research 2004;(419):21-9. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Bayat 2018
    1. Bayat M, Virdi A, Jalalifirouzkouhi R, Rezaei F. Comparison of effects of LLLT and LIPUS on fracture healing in animal models and patients: A systematic review. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 2018;132:3-22. - PubMed
Boutron 2008
    1. Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P, CONSORT Group. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008;148(4):295-309. - PubMed
Busse 2009
    1. Busse JW, Kaur J, Mollon B, Bhandari M, Tornetta P 3rd, Schunemann HJ, et al. Low intensity pulsed ultrasonography for fractures: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2009;338:b351. - PMC - PubMed
Cook 1997
    1. Cook SD, Ryaby JP, McCabe J, Frey JJ, Heckman JD, Kristiansen TK. Acceleration of tibia and distal radius fracture healing in patients who smoke. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research 1997;(337):198-207. - PubMed
Copay 2018
    1. Copay AG, Chung AS, Eyberg B, Olmscheid N, Chutkan N, Spangehl MJ . Minimum clinically important difference: current trends in the Orthopaedic literature, part I: upper extremity. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery 2018;6(9):e1. - PubMed
Ebrahim 2014
    1. Ebrahim S, Mollon B, Bance S, Busse JW, Bhandari M. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasonography versus electrical stimulation for fracture healing: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Surgery 2014;57(3):E105. - PMC - PubMed
Einhorn 1995
    1. Einhorn TA. Enhancement of fracture healing. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery - American Volume 1995;77(6):940-56. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
GRADEpro GDT [Computer program]
    1. GRADEpro GDT. McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime). Hamilton (ON): McMaster University (developed by Evidence Prime), 2015, Version accessed 28 February 2022.
Guyatt 2008
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. British Medical Journal 2008;336(7650):924-6. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Hadjiargyrou 1998
    1. Hadjiargyrou M, McLeod K, Ryaby JP, Rubin C. Enhancement of fracture healing by low intensity ultrasound. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research 1998;(355 Suppl):S216-29. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Hannemann 2014
    1. Hannemann PF, Mommers EH, Schots JP, Brink PR, Poeze M. The effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound and pulsed electromagnetic fields bone growth stimulation in acute fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2014;134(8):1093-106. - PubMed
Harrison 2021
    1. Harrison A, Alt V. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) for stimulation of bone healing – a narrative review. Injury 2021;52(Supplement 2):S91-6. - PubMed
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327(7414):557-60. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JP, Altman DG. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Horsman 2003
    1. Horsman J, Furlong W, Feeny D, Torrance G. The Health Utilities Index (HUI®): concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2003;1(54):1-13. - PMC - PubMed
Lai 2021
    1. Lai WC, Iglesias BC, Mark BJ, Wang D. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound augments tendon, ligament, and bone–soft tissue healing in preclinical animal models: a systematic review. Arthroscopy: the Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery 2021;37(7):2318-33. - PubMed
Lefebvre 2019
    1. Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M-I, et al. Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019). Cochrane, 2019.. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.
Lou 2017
    1. Lou S, Lv H, Li Z, Zhang L, Tang P. The effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on fresh fracture: a meta-analysis. Medicine 2017;96(39):e8181. - PMC - PubMed
McHorney 1994
    1. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Lu JF, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-itemShort-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care 1994;32(1):40-66. - PubMed
Mills 2013
    1. Mills LA, Simpson AH. The relative incidence of fracture non-union in the Scottish population (5.17 million): a 5-year epidemiological study. BMJ Open 2013;3(2):e002276. - PMC - PubMed
Moher 2009
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 2009;6(7):e1000097. [PMID: ] - PMC - PubMed
Nakashima 2021
    1. Nakashima M, Saito T, Takahashi T, Matsumura T, Takeshita K. Younger age is a significant factor for poorer adherence in fracture patients who received low-intensity pulsed ultrasound: A retrospective study. Journal of Orthopaedic Science 2021;S0949-2658(21):00352-3. - PubMed
Poolman 2017
    1. Poolman RW, Agoritsas T, Siemieniuk RA, Harris IA, Schipper IB, Mollon B, et al. Low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) for bone healing: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ 2017;356:j576. - PubMed
Puts 2021
    1. Puts R, Vico L, Beilfuß N, Shaka M, Padilla F, Raum K. Pulsed ultrasound for bone regeneration - outcomes and hurdles in the clinical application: a systematic review. European Cells & Materials 2021;42:281-311. - PubMed
Reher 1997
    1. Reher P, Elbeshir el-NI, Harvey W, Meghji S, Harris M. The stimulation of bone formation in vitro by therapeutic ultrasound. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 1997;23(8):1251-8. [PMID: ] - PubMed
Rutten 2016
    1. Rutten S, Van Den Bekerom MP, Sierevelt IN, Nolte PA. Enhancement of bone-healing by low-intensity pulsed ultrasound: a systematic review. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Reviews 2016;4(3):e6. - PubMed
Schandelmaier 2017
    1. Schandelmaier S, Kaushal A, Lytvyn L, Heels-Ansdell D, Siemieniuk RA, Agoritsas T, et al. Low intensity pulsed ultrasound for bone healing: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. BMJ 2017;356:j656. - PMC - PubMed
Seifert 2013 B
    1. Seifert J. Personal communication. 30 October 2013.
Sijie 2021
    1. Sijie X, Qi L. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in treatment of fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research 2021;25(12):1944-50.
Sterne 2017
    1. Sterne JA, Egger M, Moher D, Boutron I (editors). Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JP, Churchill R, Chandler J, Cumpston MS (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.2.0 (updated June 2017), Cochrane, 2017. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook.
Suzuki 2009
    1. Suzuki A, Takayama T, Suzuki N, Kojima T, Ota N, Asano S, et al. Daily low-intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulates production of bone morphogenetic protein in ROS 17/2.8 cells. Journal of Oral Science 2009;51(1):29-36. - PubMed
Tajali 2012
    1. Tajali SB, Houghton P, MacDermid JC, Grewal R. Effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound therapy on fracture healing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2012;91(4):349-67. - PubMed
Tarride 2017
    1. Tarride JE, Hopkins RB, Blackhouse G, Burke N, Bhandari M, Johal H, et al. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound for treatment of tibial fractures: an economic evaluation of the TRUST study. Bone and Joint Journal 2017;99-B(11):1526-32. - PubMed
Tashjian 2009
    1. Tashjian RZ, Deloach J, Porucznik CA, Powell AP. Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery December 2009;18(6):927-32. - PubMed
Victoria 2009
    1. Victoria G, Petrisor B, Drew B, Dick D. Bone stimulation for fracture healing: What's all the fuss? Indian Journal of Orthopaedics 2009;43(2):117-20. - PMC - PubMed
Wang 1994
    1. Wang SJ, Lewallen DG, Bolander ME, Chao EY, Ilstrup DM, Greenleaf JF. Low intensity ultrasound treatment increases strength in a rat femoral fracture model. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 1994;12(1):40-7. [PMID: ] - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Griffin 2012
    1. Griffin XL, Smith N, Parsons N, Costa ML. Ultrasound and shockwave therapy for acute fractures in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. Art. No: CD008579. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008579.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Griffin 2014
    1. Griffin XL, Parsons N, Costa ML, Metcalfe. Ultrasound and shockwave therapy for acute fractures in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 6. Art. No: CD008579. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008579.pub3] - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types