ArticleHeliyon2024
Efficacy of non-pharmacological treatments for knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Acupotomy for Musculoskeletal Pain: Exploring Therapeutic Potential and Future Directions.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to conduct a network meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of seven distinct non-pharmacological therapies for knee osteoarthritis. We hope that our research findings can provide reference for clinical practitioners in formulating treatment plans. Methods: Through a computer-based search, we systematically retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on non-pharmacological therapies for knee osteoarthritis from eight databases, including CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library. Following screening, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment, relevant data were included and analyzed using R 4.2.3 software. Results: A comprehensive analysis of 24 RCTs involving 2582 patients encompassed seven diverse non-pharmacological therapies. The efficacy rankings, based on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, were as follows: shock wave therapy > needle-knife > laser therapy > acupuncture > ultrasound > exercise > transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Similarly, based on Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total scores, the efficacy rankings were as follows: shock wave therapy > needle-knife > laser therapy > acupuncture > ultrasound > transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation > exercise. Among the three WOMAC subscales, the efficacy rankings for non-pharmacological therapies were as follows: For stiffness: laser therapy > exercise > shock wave therapy > acupuncture > needle-knife > ultrasound > transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; For daily activities: shock wave therapy > laser therapy > needle-knife > acupuncture > ultrasound > transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation > exercise; For pain: shock wave therapy > needle-knife > laser therapy > acupuncture > exercise > transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation > ultrasound. Conclusion: Based on the currently limited research, we can prioritize the use of shockwave therapy to treat patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, it is essential to emphasize that further rigorous and well-designed randomized controlled trials are necessary to validate the conclusions drawn from this study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.