Objectives The multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) score is an objective tool for monitoring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Here we report a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical value of the MBDA score in RA. Methods We performed a systematic literature search in five medical databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science, from inception to 13 October 2021. Original articles reporting on the performance of the MBDA score’s correlation with conventional disease activity measures, or the predictive and the discriminative value of the MBDA score for radiographic progression, therapy response, remission, and relapse were included. Results Our systematic search provided a total of 1190 records. After selection and citation searches, we identified 32 eligible studies. We recorded moderate correlations between MBDA score and conventional DAMs at baseline (COR = 0.45, CI: 0.28–0.59; I2 = 71.0% for DAS28 CRP and COR = 0.55, CI: 0.19–0.78; I2 = 0.0% for DAS28-ESR) and at follow-up (COR = 0.44, CI: 0.28–0.57; I2 = 70.0% for DAS28 CRP), and found that the odds of radiographic progression were significantly higher for patients with a high baseline MBDA score (>44) than for patients with a low baseline MBDA score (<30) (OR = 1.03, CI: 1.02–1.05; I2 = 10.0%). Conclusion MBDA score might be used as an objective disease activity marker. In addition, it is also a reliable prognostic marker of radiographic progression.

Essential oils (EOs) are widely used topically in musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs); however, their clinical efficacy is controversial. Our aim was to find evidence that topical EOs are beneficial as an add-on treatment in MSDs. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence on the available data of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The protocol of this work was registered on PROSPERO. We used Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, Central Cochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases for systematic search. Eight RCTs were included in the quantitative analysis. In conclusion, EO therapy had a favorable effect on pain intensity (primary outcome) compared to placebo. The greatest pain-relieving effect of EO therapy was calculated immediately after the intervention (MD of pain intensity = −0.87; p = 0.014). EO therapy had a slightly better analgesic effect than placebo one week after the intervention (MD of pain intensity = −0.58; p = 0.077) and at the four-week follow-up as well (MD of pain intensity = −0.52; p = 0.049). EO therapy had a beneficial effect on stiffness (a secondary outcome) compared to the no intervention group (MD = −0.77; p = 0.061). This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that topical EOs are beneficial as an add-on treatment in reducing pain and stiffness in the investigated MSDs.