Dataset Information

Clinical assessment of effusion in knee osteoarthritis-A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim of this systematic review was to determine the validity and inter- and intra-observer reliability of the assessment of knee joint effusion in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Methods

MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, EMBASE, and AMED were searched from their inception to February 2015. Articles were included according to a priori defined criteria: samples containing participants with knee OA; prospective evaluation of clinical tests and assessments of knee effusion that included reliability, sensitivity, and specificity of these tests.

Results

A total of 10 publications were reviewed. Eight of these considered reliability and four on validity of clinical assessments against ultrasound effusion. It was not possible to undertake a meta-analysis of reliability or validity because of differences in study designs and the clinical tests. Intra-observer kappa agreement for visible swelling ranged from 0.37 (suprapatellar) to 1.0 (prepatellar); for bulge sign 0.47 and balloon sign 0.37. Inter-observer kappa agreement for visible swelling ranged from -0.02 (prepatellar) to 0.65 (infrapatellar), the balloon sign -0.11 to 0.82, patellar tap -0.02 to 0.75 and bulge sign kappa -0.04 to 0.14 or reliability coefficient 0.97. Reliability and diagnostic accuracy tended to be better in experienced observers. Very few data looked at performance of individual clinical tests with sensitivity ranging 18.2-85.7% and specificity 35.3-93.3%, both higher with larger effusions.

Conclusion

The majority of unstandardized clinical tests to assess joint effusion in knee OA had relatively low intra- and inter-observer reliability. There is some evidence experience improved reliability and diagnostic accuracy of tests. Currently there is insufficient evidence to recommend any particular test in clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Maricar N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4823277 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical assessment of effusion in knee osteoarthritis-A systematic review.

Maricar Nasimah N Callaghan Michael J MJ Parkes Matthew J MJ Felson David T DT O'Neill Terence W TW

Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism 20151022 5

<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this systematic review was to determine the validity and inter- and intra-observer reliability of the assessment of knee joint effusion in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.<h4>Methods</h4>MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, EMBASE, and AMED were searched from their inception to February 2015. Articles were included according to a priori defined criteria: samples containing participants with knee OA; prospective evaluation of clinical tests and assessments of knee effus ...[more]

PMID: 26581486

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis (OA) and lower back pain (LBP) are most common health problems which lead to pain and disability. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence to find any relationship between knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and LBP or any potential causation.MethodsThe databases of Scopus, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched from inception to 01 October 2022. Any study published in English assessing live humans over 18 years with KOA and LBP was eligible to be included. Studies were independently screened by two researchers. Data of the included studies were extracted based on the participants, outcomes related to knee and lumbar spine, reported association or causation between LBP and KOA, and study design. Data were narratively analyzed and presented as graphs and table. Methodology quality was assessed.ResultsOf 9953 titles and abstracts, duplicates were removed, and 7552 were screened. Altogether, 88 full texts were screened, and 13 were eligible for the final inclusion. There were some biomechanical and clinical causations were observed for the concurrent presence of LBP and KOA. Biomechanically, high pelvic incidence is a risk factor for development of spondylolisthesis and KOA. Clinically, knee pain intensity was higher in KOA when presents with LBP. Less than 20% of studies have justified their sample size during the quality assessment.DiscussionDevelopment and progression of KOA in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis may be induced by significantly greater mismatches of lumbo-pelvic sagittal alignment. Elderly patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and severe KOA reported a different pelvic morphology, increased sagittal malalignment with a lack of lumbar lordosis due to double-level listhesis, and greater knee flexion contracture than in patients with no to mild and moderate KOA. People with concurrent LBP and KOA have reported poor function with more disability. Both LBP and lumbar kyphosis indicate functional disability and knee symptoms in patients with KOA.ConclusionsDifferent biomechanical and clinical causations were revealed for the concurrent existence of KOA and LBP. Therefore, careful assessment of both back and knee joints should be considered when treating KOA and vice versa.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022238571.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a prevalent form of chronic joint disease associated with functional restrictions and pain. Activity limitations negatively impact social connectedness and psychological well-being, reducing the quality of life (QoL) of patients. The purpose of this review is to summarize the existing information on QoL in KOA patients and share the reported individual factors, which may influence it. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review examining the literature up to JAN/2017 available at MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and PsycINFO using KOA and QOL related keywords. Inclusion criteria were QOL compared to at least one demographic factor (e.g., age, gender), lifestyle factor (e.g., functional independence), or comorbidity factor (e.g., diabetes, obesity) and a control group. Analytical methods were not considered as part of the original design. RESULTS:A total of 610 articles were reviewed, of which 62 met inclusion criteria. Instruments used to measure QoL included: SF-36, EQ-5D, KOOS, WHOQOL, HAS, AIMS, NHP and JKOM. All studies reported worse QoL in KOA patients when compared to a control group. When females were compared to males, females reported worse QOL. Obesity as well as lower level of physical activity were reported with lower QoL scores. Knee self-management programs delivered by healthcare professionals improved QoL in patients with KOA. Educational level and higher total mindfulness were reported to improve QoL whereas poverty, psychological distress, depression and lacking familial relationships reduce it. Surgical KOA interventions resulted in good to excellent outcomes generally; although, results varied by age, weight, and depression. CONCLUSION:KOA has a substantial impact on QoL. In KOA patients, QoL is also influenced by specific individual factors including gender, body weight, physical activity, mental health, and education. Importantly, education and management programs designed to support KOA patients report improved QoL. QoL data is a valuable tool providing health care professionals with a better comprehension of KOA disease to aid implementation of the most effective management plan.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of viscosupplementation for pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Data sourcesSearches were conducted of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases from inception to 11 September 2021. Unpublished trials were identified from the grey literature and trial registries.Eligibility criteria for study selectionRandomised trials comparing viscosupplementation with placebo or no intervention for knee osteoarthritis treatment.Main outcome measuresThe prespecified primary outcome was pain intensity. Secondary outcomes were function and serious adverse events. Pain and function were analysed as standardised mean differences (SMDs). The prespecified minimal clinically important between group difference was -0.37 SMD. Serious adverse events were analysed as relative risks.MethodsTwo reviewers independently extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias of trials using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The predefined main analysis was based only on large, placebo controlled trials with ≥100 participants per group. Summary results were obtained through a random effects meta-analysis model. Cumulative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis under a random effects model were also performed.Results169 trials provided data on 21 163 randomised participants. Evidence of small study effects and publication biases was observed for pain and function (Egger's tests with P<0.001 and asymmetric funnel plots). Twenty four large, placebo controlled trials (8997 randomised participants) included in the main analysis of pain indicated that viscosupplementation was associated with a small reduction in pain intensity compared with placebo (SMD -0.08, 95% confidence interval -0.15 to -0.02), with the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval excluding the minimal clinically important between group difference. This effect corresponds to a difference in pain scores of -2.0 mm (95% confidence interval -3.8 to -0.5 mm) on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Trial sequential analysis for pain indicated that since 2009 there has been conclusive evidence of clinical equivalence between viscosupplementation and placebo. Similar conclusions were obtained for function. Based on 15 large, placebo controlled trials on 6462 randomised participants, viscosupplementation was associated with a statistically significant higher risk of serious adverse events than placebo (relative risk 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.98).ConclusionStrong conclusive evidence indicates that viscosupplementation leads to a small reduction in knee osteoarthritis pain compared with placebo, but the difference is less than the minimal clinically important between group difference. Strong conclusive evidence indicates that viscosupplementation is also associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events compared with placebo. The findings do not support broad use of viscosupplementation for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021236894.

Project description:BackgroundThere is no cure for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and typically patients live approximately 30-years with the disease. Most common medical treatments result in short-term palliation of symptoms with little consideration of long-term risk. This systematic review aims to appraise the current evidence for the long-term (≥12 months) safety of common treatments for knee osteoarthritis (KOA).MethodsCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline and PubMed were systematically searched from 1990 to July 2017, inclusive. Inclusion criteria were 1) peer-reviewed publications investigating treatments for KOA referred to in the Australian Clinical Care Standard and/or Therapeutic Guidelines: Rheumatology 2) specifically addressing safety of the treatments 3) with ≥12 months of follow-up and 4) Downs and Black quality score ≥ 13.ResultsThirty-four studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Lifestyle modifications (moderate exercise and weight loss), paracetamol, glucosamine, Intraarticular Hyaluronic Acid (IAHA) and platelet-rich-plasma (PRP) injections have a low risk of harm and beneficial ≥12 month outcomes. Although Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) provide pain relief, they are associated with increased risk of medical complications. Cortisone injections are associated with radiological cartilage degeneration at > 12 months. Arthroscopy for degenerative meniscal tears in KOA leads to a 3-fold increase in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). TKA improves primary outcomes of KOA but has a low rate of significant medical complications.ConclusionsGiven the safety and effectiveness of lifestyle interventions such as weight loss and exercise, these should be advocated in all patients due to the low risk of harm. The use of NSAIDs should be minimized to avoid gastrointestinal complications. Treatment with opioids has a lack of evidence for use and a high risk of long-term harm. The use of IAHA and PRP may provide additional symptomatic benefit without the risk of harm. TKA is associated with significant medical complications but is justified by the efficacy of joint replacement in late-stage disease.Trial registrationPROSPERO International prospective register for systematic reviews; registration number CRD42017072809 .

Project description:BackgroundThe use of laboratory-expanded mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) is subject to several restrictions, resulting in "minimal manipulation" methods becoming the current most popular strategy to increase the use of MSCs in an orthopaedic practice. The aim of the present systematic review is to assess the clinical applications of "minimally" manipulated MSCs, either as bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) or as stromal vascular fraction (SVF), in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).MethodsA systematic review of three databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar) was performed using the following keywords: "Knee Osteoarthritis" with "(Bone marrow aspirate) OR (bone marrow concentrate)" or with "(adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells) OR (adipose derived stromal cells) OR (stromal vascular fraction) OR (SVF)" as either keywords or MeSH terms. The reference lists of all retrieved articles were further reviewed for identification of potentially relevant studies.ResultsTwenty-three papers were included in the final analysis (10 on BMAC and 13 on SVF). Of these, only 4 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Bias risk evaluation, performed using a modified Coleman score, revealed an overall poor quality of the studies. In terms of clinical application, despite the apparent safety of minimally manipulated MSCs and the short-term positive clinical outcomes associated with their use, clinicians reported different preparation and administration methods, ranging from single intra-articular injections to intraosseous applications to administration in combination with other surgical procedures.ConclusionsThe available literature is undermined by both the lack of high-quality studies and the varied clinical settings and different protocols reported in the few RCTs presently published. This prevents any recommendation on the use of either product in a clinical practice. Nevertheless, the use of minimally manipulated MSCs (in the form of BMAC or SVF) has been shown to be safe and have some short-term beneficial effects.

Dataset Information

Clinical assessment of effusion in knee osteoarthritis-A systematic review.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Clinical assessment of effusion in knee osteoarthritis-A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets