Making the current non-surgical treatments for knee osteoarthritis more effective: Solutions from a diverse patient group

Singh, Jasvinder A

doi:10.1016/j.jbspin.2023.105535

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pharmacotherapy, physical therapy, rehabilitation therapy, acupuncture, massage, surgery (including total knee replacement), and additional methods are all viable options for managing KOA. Nevertheless, the extended utilization of these medications presents a potential for a multitude of detrimental effects, including hypertension, renal toxicity, gastrointestinal impairment, congestive heart failure, and cardiovascular incidents [ 4 ]. Additionally, physical therapy is not appropriate for terminal patients who require surgical intervention, among other limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of traditional Chinese exercise for knee osteoarthritis (KOA): an overview of systematic reviews

Tao,

Shi,

Tan

et al. 2024

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) has become a public health issue. Several systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) indicate that traditional Chinese exercise (TCE) may be an effective treatment for reducing pain and stiffness and improving physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Objectives To evaluate the literature quality and evidence for the systematic reviews of TCE for KOA and provide evidence to support the clinical application of TCE for KOA. Methods Eight databases were searched from their inception to January 3, 2023, to retrieve relevant literature, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), China Biology Medical literature database (CBM), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, without restrictions on publication date or language. AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA 2020 assessed the methodological and reporting quality of included SRs/MAs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was utilized to evaluate the quality of evidence. Results A total of 18 SRs/MAs were included. The methodological quality was “very low” based on AMSTAR-2. The overall reporting quality was deficient based on PRISMA 2020. The quality of Chinese and English literature differed, with English literature being superior in methodological and reporting quality. Among 93 pieces of evidence obtained, 46 (49.46%) were of very low quality, 34 (36.56%) were of low quality, 13 (13.98%) were of moderate quality, and none were of high quality. TCE was supported by 76 pieces of evidence (81.72%). Conclusion TCE appears beneficial and safe for managing KOA. However, due to the relatively low methodological and evidentiary quality of included SRs/MAs, clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%