Treatments for shoulder impingement syndrome: a PRISMA systematic review and network meta-analysis

Wei Dong, Hans Goost, Xiang-Bo Lin, Christof Burger, Christian Paul, Zeng-Li Wang, Tian-Yi Zhang, Zhi-Chao Jiang, Kristian Welle, Koroush Kabir, Wei Dong, Hans Goost, Xiang-Bo Lin, Christof Burger, Christian Paul, Zeng-Li Wang, Tian-Yi Zhang, Zhi-Chao Jiang, Kristian Welle, Koroush Kabir

Abstract

Many treatments for shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS) are available in clinical practice; some of which have already been compared with other treatments by various investigators. However, a comprehensive treatment comparison is lacking. Several widely used electronic databases were searched for eligible studies. The outcome measurements were the pain score and the Constant-Murley score (CMS). Direct comparisons were performed using the conventional pair-wise meta-analysis method, while a network meta-analysis based on the Bayesian model was used to calculate the results of all potentially possible comparisons and rank probabilities. Included in the meta-analysis procedure were 33 randomized controlled trials involving 2300 patients. Good agreement was demonstrated between the results of the pair-wise meta-analyses and the network meta-analyses. Regarding nonoperative treatments, with respect to the pain score, combined treatments composed of exercise and other therapies tended to yield better effects than single-intervention therapies. Localized drug injections that were combined with exercise showed better treatment effects than any other treatments, whereas worse effects were observed when such injections were used alone. Regarding the CMS, most combined treatments based on exercise also demonstrated better effects than exercise alone. Regarding surgical treatments, according to the pain score and the CMS, arthroscopic subacromial decompression (ASD) together with treatments derived from it, such as ASD combined with radiofrequency and arthroscopic bursectomy, showed better effects than open subacromial decompression (OSD) and OSD combined with the injection of platelet-leukocyte gel. Exercise therapy also demonstrated good performance. Results for inconsistency, sensitivity analysis, and meta-regression all supported the robustness and reliability of these network meta-analyses. Exercise and other exercise-based therapies, such as kinesio taping, specific exercises, and acupuncture, are ideal treatments for patients at an early stage of SIS. However, low-level laser therapy and the localized injection of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are not recommended. For patients who have a long-term disease course, operative treatments may be considered, with standard ASD surgery preferred over arthroscopic bursectomy and the open surgical technique for subacromial decompression. Notwithstanding, the choice of surgery should be made cautiously because similar outcomes may also be achieved by the implementation of exercise therapy.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
PRISMA 2009 flow diagram.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
(A) Risk of bias graph. (B) Risk of bias summary.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
(A) Network 1: Nonoperative treatments (pain score). (B) Network 2: Nonoperative treatments (CMS). (C) Network 3: Operative treatments (pain score). (D) Network 4: Operative treatments (CMS). Note: the size of the circle represents the number of patients; the thickness of the edge represents the number of studies. ACU = acupuncture therapy, ASD = routine arthroscopic subacromial decompression, COR = corticosteroid injection, DF = diacutaneous fibrolysis therapy, EXE = routine exercise treatment, KT = kinesio taping therapy, LLLT = low-level laser therapy, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, OSD = open subacromial decompression, PEMF = pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, PLG = platelet-leukocyte gel injection, RF = radiofrequency therapy, SE = specific exercise therapy, US = ultrasound therapy.
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
(A) Treatments compared with EXE (pain score). (B) Treatments compared with EXE (CMS). ACU = acupuncture therapy, COR = corticosteroid injection, DF = diacutaneous fibrolysis therapy, EXE = routine exercise treatment, HYA = hyaluronate injection, KT = kinesio taping therapy, LLLT = low-level laser therapy, MAN = manual therapy, MWD = microwave diathermy therapy, NON = no treatment/placebo, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, PEMF = pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, rESWT = radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy, SE = specific exercise therapy, US = ultrasound therapy.
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
(A) Rank probability of nonoperative treatments (pain score). (B) Rank probability of nonoperative treatments (CMS). (C) Rank probability of operative treatments (pain score). (D) Rank probability of operative treatments (CMS). Note: 1. Different gray scales represent different ranks, with rank 1 representing the best and rank n representing the worst. 2. Each treatment has a sum of 1.0 for all its possible rank probabilities. 3. The darkness of each bar represents the effectiveness of the corresponding treatment, with darker shades signifying better effectiveness. ACU = acupuncture therapy, ASD = routine arthroscopic subacromial decompression, COR = corticosteroid injection, DF = diacutaneous fibrolysis therapy, EXE = routine exercise treatment, HYA = hyaluronate injection, KT = kinesio taping therapy, LLLT = low-level laser therapy, MAN = manual therapy, MWD = microwave diathermy therapy, NON = no treatment/placebo, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, onlyBUR = arthroscopic bursectomy without acromioplasty, OSD = open subacromial decompression, PEMF = pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, PLG = platelet-leukocyte gel injection, rESWT = radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy, RF = radiofrequency therapy, SE = specific exercise therapy, US = ultrasound therapy.
FIGURE 6
FIGURE 6
(A) SUCRA for nonoperative treatments (pain score). (B) SUCRA for nonoperative treatments (CMS). (C) SUCRA for operative treatments (pain score). (D) SUCRA for operative treatments (CMS). Note: The area under the curve represents the cumulative rank probability of each treatment, with larger areas signifying higher probabilities. ACU = acupuncture therapy, ASD = routine arthroscopic subacromial decompression, COR = corticosteroid injection, DF = diacutaneous fibrolysis therapy, EXE = routine exercise treatment, HYA = hyaluronate injection, KT = kinesio taping therapy, LLLT = low-level laser therapy, MAN = manual therapy, MWD = microwave diathermy therapy, NON = no treatment/placebo, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, onlyBUR = arthroscopic bursectomy without acromioplasty, OSD = open subacromial decompression, PEMF = pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, PLG = platelet-leukocyte gel injection, rESWT = radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy, RF = radiofrequency therapy, SE = specific exercise therapy, US = ultrasound therapy.
FIGURE 6 (Continued)
FIGURE 6 (Continued)
(A) SUCRA for nonoperative treatments (pain score). (B) SUCRA for nonoperative treatments (CMS). (C) SUCRA for operative treatments (pain score). (D) SUCRA for operative treatments (CMS). Note: The area under the curve represents the cumulative rank probability of each treatment, with larger areas signifying higher probabilities. ACU = acupuncture therapy, ASD = routine arthroscopic subacromial decompression, COR = corticosteroid injection, DF = diacutaneous fibrolysis therapy, EXE = routine exercise treatment, HYA = hyaluronate injection, KT = kinesio taping therapy, LLLT = low-level laser therapy, MAN = manual therapy, MWD = microwave diathermy therapy, NON = no treatment/placebo, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, onlyBUR = arthroscopic bursectomy without acromioplasty, OSD = open subacromial decompression, PEMF = pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, PLG = platelet-leukocyte gel injection, rESWT = radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy, RF = radiofrequency therapy, SE = specific exercise therapy, US = ultrasound therapy.
FIGURE 6 (Continued)
FIGURE 6 (Continued)
(A) SUCRA for nonoperative treatments (pain score). (B) SUCRA for nonoperative treatments (CMS). (C) SUCRA for operative treatments (pain score). (D) SUCRA for operative treatments (CMS). Note: The area under the curve represents the cumulative rank probability of each treatment, with larger areas signifying higher probabilities. ACU = acupuncture therapy, ASD = routine arthroscopic subacromial decompression, COR = corticosteroid injection, DF = diacutaneous fibrolysis therapy, EXE = routine exercise treatment, HYA = hyaluronate injection, KT = kinesio taping therapy, LLLT = low-level laser therapy, MAN = manual therapy, MWD = microwave diathermy therapy, NON = no treatment/placebo, NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug injection, onlyBUR = arthroscopic bursectomy without acromioplasty, OSD = open subacromial decompression, PEMF = pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, PLG = platelet-leukocyte gel injection, rESWT = radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy, RF = radiofrequency therapy, SE = specific exercise therapy, US = ultrasound therapy.

References

    1. Van der Heijden GJM. Shoulder disorders: a state-of-the-art review. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 1999; 13:287–309.
    1. Michener LA, McClure PW, Karduna AR. Anatomical and biomechanical mechanisms of subacromial impingement syndrome. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2003; 18:369–379.
    1. Koester MC, George MS, Kuhn JE. Shoulder impingement syndrome. Am J Med 2005; 118:452–455.
    1. Neer CSII. Impingement lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983; 70–77.
    1. Aktas I, Akgun K, Cakmak B. Therapeutic effect of pulsed electromagnetic field in conservative treatment of subacromial impingement syndrome. Clin Rheumatol 2007; 26:1234–1239.
    1. Galace De Freitas D, Marcondes FB, Monteiro RL, et al. Pulsed electromagnetic field and exercises in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2014; 95:345–352.
    1. Senbursa G, Baltaci G, Atay A. Comparison of conservative treatment with and without manual physical therapy for patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007; 15:915–921.
    1. Bang MD, Deyle GD. Comparison of supervised exercise with and without manual physical therapy for patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2000; 30:126–137.
    1. Conroy DE, Hayes KW. The effect of joint mobilization as a component of comprehensive treatment for primary shoulder impingement syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998; 28:3–14.
    1. Cook C, Learman K, Houghton S, et al. The addition of cervical unilateral posterior-anterior mobilisation in the treatment of patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a randomised clinical trial. Man Ther 2014; 19:18–24.
    1. Johansson K, Bergstrom A, Schroder K, et al. Subacromial corticosteroid injection or acupuncture with home exercises when treating patients with subacromial impingement in primary care-a randomized clinical trial. Fam Pract 2011; 28:355–365.
    1. Hong JY, Yoon SH, Moon DJ, et al. Comparison of high- and low-dose corticosteroid in subacromial injection for periarticular shoulder disorder: A randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92:1951–1960.
    1. Min KS, Pierre St, Ryan P, et al. A double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of subacromial injection with corticosteroid versus NSAID in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013; 22:595–601.
    1. Penning LIF, De Bie RA, Walenkamp GHIM. The effectiveness of injections of hyaluronic acid or corticosteroid in patients with subacromial impingement: a three-arm randomised controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94:1246–1252.
    1. Kim YS, Park JY, Lee CS, et al. Does hyaluronate injection work in shoulder disease in early stage? A multicenter, randomized, single blind and open comparative clinical study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2012; 21:722–727.
    1. Karthikeyan S, Kwong HT, Upadhyay PK, et al. A double-blind randomised controlled study comparing subacromial injection of tenoxicam or methylprednisolone in patients with subacromial impingement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92:77–82.
    1. Celik D, Atalar AC, Guclu A, et al. The contribution of subacromial injection to the conservative treatment of impingement syndrome. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2009; 43:331–335.
    1. Akgun K, Birtane M, Akarirmak U. Is local subacromial corticosteroid injection beneficial in subacromial impingement syndrome? Clin Rheumatol 2004; 23:496–500.
    1. Barra Lopez ME, Lopez de Celis C, Fernandez Jentsch G, et al. Effectiveness of diacutaneous fibrolysis for the treatment of subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Man Ther 2013; 18:418–424.
    1. Holmgren T, Hallgren HB, Oberg B, et al. Effect of specific exercise strategy on need for surgery in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: randomised controlled study. BMJ (Online) 2012; 344:
    1. Beaudreuil J, Lasbleiz S, Richette P, et al. Assessment of dynamic humeral centering in shoulder pain with impingement syndrome: a randomised clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70:1613–1618.
    1. Baskurt Z, Baskurt F, Gelecek N, et al. The effectiveness of scapular stabilization exercise in the patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2011; 24:173–179.
    1. Akyol Y, Ulus Y, Durmus D, et al. Effectiveness of microwave diathermy on pain, functional capacity, muscle strength, quality of life, and depression in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomized placebo-controlled clinical study. Rheumatol Int 2012; 32:3007–3016.
    1. Calis HT, Berberoglu N, Calis M. Are ultrasound, laser and exercise superior to each other in the treatment of subacromial impingement syndrome? A randomized clinical trial. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2011; 47:375–380.
    1. Abrisham SMJ, Kermani-Alghoraishi M, Ghahramani R, et al. Additive effects of low-level laser therapy with exercise on subacromial syndrome: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Clin Rheumatol 2011; 30:1341–1346.
    1. Dogan SK, Saime A, Evcik D. The effectiveness of low laser therapy in subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomized placebo controlled double-blind prospective study. Clinics 2010; 65:1019–1022.
    1. Yeldan I, Cetin E, Razak Ozdincler A. The effectiveness of low-level laser therapy on shoulder function in subacromial impingement syndrome. Disabil Rehabil 2009; 31:935–940.
    1. Bal A, Eksioglu E, Gurcay E, et al. Low-level laser therapy in subacromial impingement syndrome. Photomed Laser Surg 2009; 27:31–36.
    1. Engebretsen K, Grotle M, Bautz-Holter E, et al. Radial extracorporeal shockwave treatment compared with supervised exercises in patients with subacromial pain syndrome: single blind randomised study. BMJ 2009; 339:b3360.
    1. Vas J, Ortega C, Olmo V, et al. Single-point acupuncture and physiotherapy for the treatment of painful shoulder: a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Rheumatology 2008; 47:887–893.
    1. Haahr JP, Ostergaard S, Dalsgaard J, et al. Exercises versus arthroscopic decompression in patients with subacromial impingement: a randomised, controlled study in 90 cases with a one year follow up. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64:760–764.
    1. Husby T, Haugstvedt JR, Brandt M, et al. Open versus arthroscopic subacromial decompression: a prospective, randomized study of 34 patients followed for 8 years. Acta Orthop Scand 2003; 74:408–414.
    1. Spangehl MJ, Hawkins RH, McCormack RG, et al. Arthroscopic versus open acromioplasty: a prospective, randomized, blinded study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002; 11:101–107.
    1. Brox JI, Gjengedal E, Uppheim G, et al. Arthroscopic surgery versus supervised exercises in patients with rotator cuff disease (stage II impingement syndrome): a prospective, randomized, controlled study in 125 patients with a 2 1/2-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1999; 8:102–111.
    1. Haahr JP, Andersen JH. Exercises may be as efficient as subacromial decompression in patients with subacromial stage II impingement: 4–8-Years’ follow-up in a prospective, randomized study. Scand J Rheumatol 2006; 35:224–228.
    1. Henkus HE, De Witte PB, Nelissen RGHH, et al. Bursectomy compared with acromioplasty in the management of subacromial impingement syndrome: a prospective randomised study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91:504–510.
    1. T’Jonck L, Lysens R, De Smet L, et al. Open versus arthroscopic subacromial decompression: analysis of one-year results. Physiother Res Int 1997; 2:46–61.
    1. Lu Y, Zhang Q, Zhu Y, et al. Is radiofrequency treatment effective for shoulder impingement syndrome? A prospective randomized controlled study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013; 22:1488–1494.
    1. Everts PA, Devilee RJJ, Brown Mahoney C, et al. Exogenous application of platelet-leukocyte gel during open subacromial decompression contributes to improved patient outcome: a prospective randomized double-blind study. Eur Surg Res 2008; 40:203–210.
    1. Ades AE, Sculpher M, Sutton A, et al. Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis in cost-effectiveness analysis. Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24:1–19.
    1. Hawkins N, Scott DA, Woods BS, et al. No study left behind: a network meta-analysis in non-small-cell lung cancer demonstrating the importance of considering all relevant data. Value Health 2009; 12:996–1003.
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6:
    1. Zeng XT, Zhang C, Li S, et al. Constructing the doodle for performing meta-analysis in WinBUGS software. CJEBM 2014; 14:101–109.
    1. Brooks SP, Gelman A. General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. J Comput Graph Stat 1998; 7:434–455.
    1. Chaimani A, Higgins JPT, Mavridis D, et al. Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One 2013; 8:
    1. Song F, Altman DG, Glenny AM, et al. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ 2003; 326:472–475.
    1. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, et al. Evidence synthesis for decision making 3: heterogeneity—subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Making 2013; 33:618–640.
    1. Spiegelhalter DJ, Best NG, Carlin BP, et al. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 2002; 64:583–639.
    1. Struyf F, Nijs J, Mollekens S, et al. Scapular-focused treatment in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Rheumatol 2013; 32:73–85.
    1. Kaya E, Zinnuroglu M, Tugcu I. Kinesio taping compared to physical therapy modalities for the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome. Clin Rheumatol 2011; 30:201–207.
    1. Santamato A, Solfrizzi V, Panza F, et al. Short-term effects of high-intensity laser therapy versus ultrasound therapy in the treatment of people with subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther 2009; 89:643–652.
    1. Ketola S, Lehtinen J, Arnala I, et al. Does arthroscopic acromioplasty provide any additional value in the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome? A two-year randomised controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91:1326–1334.
    1. Maenhout AG, Mahieu NN, De Muynck M, et al. Does adding heavy load eccentric training to rehabilitation of patients with unilateral subacromial impingement result in better outcome? A randomized, clinical trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthros 2013; 21:1158–1167.
    1. Rob J. Does the addition of a corticosteroid injection to exercise therapy improve outcomes in subacromial impingement syndrome? Clin J Sport Med 2011; 21:463–464.
    1. Engebretsen K, Grotle M, Bautz-Holter E, et al. Supervised exercises compared with radial extracorporeal shock-wave therapy for subacromial shoulder pain: 1-year results of a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther 2011; 91:37–47.
    1. Johansson KM, Adolfsson LE, Foldevi MOM. Effects of acupuncture versus ultrasound in patients with impingement syndrome: randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther 2005; 85:490–501.
    1. Murphy MA, Maze NM, Boyd JL, et al. Cost-benefit comparison: holmium laser versus electrocautery in arthroscopic acromioplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1999; 8:275–278.
    1. Kachingwe AF, Phillips B, Sletten E, et al. Comparison of manual therapy techniques with therapeutic exercise in the treatment of shoulder impingement: a randomized controlled pilot clinical trial. J Man Manip Ther 2008; 16:238–247.
    1. Taverna E, Battistella F, Sansone V, et al. Radiofrequency-based plasma microtenotomy compared with arthroscopic subacromial decompression yields equivalent outcomes for rotator cuff tendinosis. Arthroscopy 2007; 23:1042–1051.
    1. Walther M, Werner A, Stahlschmidt T, et al. The subacromial impingement syndrome of the shoulder treated by conventional physiotherapy, self-training, and a shoulder brace: results of a prospective, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2004; 13:417–423.
    1. Blair B, Rokito AS, Cuomo F, et al. Efficacy of injections of corticosteroids for subacromial impingement syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78:1685–1689.
    1. Sachs RA, Stone ML, Devine S, et al. arthroscopic acromioplasty: a prospective, randomized study. Arthroscopy 1994; 10:248–254.
    1. Brox JI, Staff PH, Ljunggren AE, et al. Arthroscopic surgery compared with supervised exercises in patients with rotator cuff disease (stage II impingement syndrome). BMJ 1993; 307:899–903.
    1. Hanratty CE, McVeigh JG, Kerr DP, et al. The effectiveness of physiotherapy exercises in subacromial impingement syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Rheum Dis 2013; 71:
    1. Kelly SM, Wrightson PA, Meads CA. Clinical outcomes of exercise in the management of subacromial impingement syndrome: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2010; 24:99–109.
    1. Kuhn JE. Exercise in the treatment of rotator cuff impingement: a systematic review and a synthesized evidence-based rehabilitation protocol. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009; 18:138–160.
    1. de Souza MC, Jorge RT, Jones A, et al. Progressive resistance training in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: literature review. Reumatismo 2009; 61:84–89.
    1. Williams S, Whatman C, Hume PA, et al. Kinesio taping in treatment and prevention of sports injuries: a meta-analysis of the evidence for its effectiveness. Sports Med 2012; 42:153–164.
    1. Kromer TO, Tautenhahn UG, De Bie RA, et al. Effects of physiotherapy in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a systematic review of the literature. J Rehabil Med 2009; 41:870–880.
    1. Faber E, Kuiper JI, Burdorf A, et al. Treatment of impingement syndrome: a systematic review of the effects on functional limitations and return to work. J Occup Rehabil 2006; 16:7–25.
    1. Donigan JA, Wolf BR. Arthroscopic subacromial decompression: acromioplasty versus bursectomy alone-does it really matter? A systematic review. Iowa Orthop J 2011; 31:121–126.
    1. Davis AD, Kakar S, Moros C, et al. Arthroscopic versus open acromioplasty: a meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38:613–618.
    1. Gebremariam L, Hay EM, Koes BW, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and postsurgical interventions for the subacromial impingement syndrome: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92:1900–1913.
    1. Simsek HH, Balki S, Keklik SS, Ozturk H, Elden H. Does Kinesio taping in addition to exercise therapy improve the outcomes in subacromial impingement syndrome? A randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica 2013; 47:104–110.
    1. Lombardi I, Jr, Magri AG, Fleury AM, Da Silva AC, Natour J. Progressive resistance training in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care and Research 2008; 59:615–622.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera