Dataset Information

Traditional Chinese Medications for Knee Osteoarthritis Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT: Traditional Chinese medication (TCM) has analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). We conducted the first systematic review of the best quantitative and qualitative evidence currently available in order to evaluate the effectiveness of TCM in relieving pain in knee OA. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using three English and four Chinese biomedical databases from their inception through March 1, 2015. We included randomized controlled trials of TCM for knee OA with intervention durations of at least two weeks. The effects of TCM on pain and other clinical symptoms were measured with the visual analog scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The total effectiveness rate, which was used to assess overall pain, physical performance and wellness, was also measured. Two researchers independently extracted data on study design, population characteristics, duration, intervention, outcomes, risk of bias, and primary results. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis when appropriate. We also explored factors that could explain the heterogeneity by conducting subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Twenty-three studies, totaling 2362 subjects, met the eligibility criteria. Treatments were formulated with an average of 8 Chinese herbs and were prescribed based on the traditional Chinese diagnostic method of syndrome differentiation. The mean treatment duration was seven weeks, with oral administration occurring one to three times a day. Compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and intra-articular hyaluronate injections, 18 of the studies showed significantly improved VAS pain scores (Mean Difference [MD] [Formula: see text] 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.94; [Formula: see text]), six of the studies showed significantly improved WOMAC pain subscale scores (MD [Formula: see text] 2.23; 95% CI, 0.56 to 3.91; [Formula: see text]), and 16 of the trials showed significantly improved total effectiveness rates (risk ratio [Formula: see text] 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.19; [Formula: see text] 0.0003). In addition, TCM showed a lower risk of adverse events than standard western treatments. This evidence suggests that TCM is safe and effective for improving pain, function, and wellness in treatments of knee OA. However, there is inherent clinical heterogeneity (diverse TCM formulations, controls, and treatment regimens) among the included trials. Despite these limitations, the potential analgesic effects of TCM warrant further methodologically rigorous research to determine the clinical implications of TCM on pain management in knee OA.

SUBMITTER: Chen B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5553612 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Growing evidences have advocated the potential benefits of traditional Chinese exercise (TCE) on symptomatic improvement of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, most of them have been derived from cross-sectional studies or case reports; the effectiveness of TCE therapies has not been fully assessed with a randomized control trial (RCT). In order to evaluate the combined clinical effectiveness of TCE for KOA, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the existing RCTs on KOA. Methods: A systematic search was performed in four electronic databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from the time of their inception to February 2020. All eligible RCTs were included in which TCE was utilized for treating KOA as compared to a control group. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and evaluated the risk of bias following the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCT. The symptoms of KOA evaluated by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were regarded as the primary outcomes in this study. Each outcome measure was pooled by a standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A meta-analysis was applied with a random or fixed effect model for the collected data to calculate the summary SMD with 95% CI based on different statistical heterogeneity. In addition, subgroup analyses were used to investigate heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis was carried out for the results of the meta-analysis. Egger's test and the funnel plots were used to examine the potential bias in the RCTs. Results: A total of 14 RCTs involving 815 patients with KOA were included. Compared with a control group; the synthesized data of TCE showed a significant improvement in WOMAC/KOOS pain score (SMD = -0.61; 95% CI: -0.86 to -0.37; p < 0.001), stiffness score (SMD = -0.75; 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.41; p < 0.001), and physical function score (SMD = -0.67; 95% CI: -0.82 to -0.53; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis suggested that TCE may be effective in alleviating pain; relieving stiffness and improving the physical function for patients with KOA. Yet; given the methodological limitations of included RCTs in this meta-analysis; more high-quality RCTs with large sample size and long-term intervention are required to further confirm the effectiveness and underlying mechanisms of TCE for treating KOA.

Project description:Background: There is increased interest in proprioceptive training for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, little consensus supports the effectiveness of this intervention. Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of proprioceptive training on symptoms, function, and proprioception in people with KOA. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from the inception dates to April 16, 2021 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were pooled by calculating the standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A random-effects model was used for the analyses. Results: A total of 24 RCTs involving 1,275 participants were included in our analysis. This study indicated that compared to no intervention, proprioceptive training significantly improved pain, stiffness, physical function, joint position sense (JPS), muscle strength, mobility, and knee ROM (P < 0.05) in people with KOA. When compared to other non-proprioceptive training, proprioceptive training provided better results in terms of JPS (SMD = -1.28, 95%CI: [-1.64, -0.92], I 2 = 0%, P < 0.00001) and mobility (timed walk over spongy surface) (SMD = -0.76, 95%CI: [-1.33, -0.18], I 2 = 64%, P = 0.01), and other results are similar. When proprioceptive training plus other non-proprioceptive training compared to other non-proprioceptive training, the two groups showed similar outcomes, but there was a greater improvement for JPS (SMD = -1.54, 95%CI: [-2.74, -0.34], I 2 = 79%, P = 0.01), physical function (SMD = -0.34, 95%CI: [-0.56, -0.12], I 2 = 0%, P = 0.003), and knee ROM (P < 0.05) in the proprioceptive training plus other non-proprioceptive training group. When proprioceptive training plus conventional physiotherapy compared against conventional physiotherapy, the two groups demonstrated similar outcomes, but there was a significant improvement for JPS (SMD = -0.95, 95%CI: [-1.73, -0.18], I 2 = 78%, P = 0.02) in the proprioceptive training plus conventional physiotherapy group. Conclusions: Proprioceptive training is safe and effective in treating KOA. There is some evidence that proprioceptive training combined with general non-proprioceptive training or conventional physiotherapy appears to be more effective and should be considered as part of the rehabilitation program. However, given that the majority of current studies investigated the short-term effect of these proprioceptive training programs, more large-scale and well-designed studies with long-term follow up are needed to determine the long-term effects of these proprioceptive training regimes in KOA. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42021240587.

Project description:BackgroundThe management of knee osteoarthritis involves various treatment strategies. It is important to explore alternative therapies that are both safe and effective. Collagen peptides have emerged as a potential intervention for knee osteoarthritis. This study aims to evaluate the analgesic effects and safety of collagen peptide in patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Multiple databases including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to 27 May 2023 that focused on the analgesic outcomes and adverse events associated with collagen peptides or hydrolyzed collagen in patients with osteoarthritis. We assessed the quality of the included studies and the strength of evidence using the Cochrane ROB 2.0 tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations.ResultsFour trials involving 507 patients with knee osteoarthritis were included and analyzed using the random-effects model. All these trials were considered to have a high risk of bias. Our results revealed a significant difference in pain relief between the collagen peptide group and the placebo group in patients with knee osteoarthritis (standardized mean difference: - 0.58; 95% CI - 0.98, - 0.18, p = 0.004; I2: 68%; quality of evidence: moderate). However, there was no significant difference in the risk of adverse events between collagen peptide and placebo (odds ratio: 1.66; 95% CI 0.99, 2.78, p = 0.05; I2: 0%; quality of evidence: very low).ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate significant pain relief in patients with knee osteoarthritis who received collagen peptides compared to those who received placebo. In addition, the risk of adverse events did not differ significantly between the collagen peptide group and the placebo group. However, due to potential biases and limitations, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to validate and confirm these findings.

Project description:Background: Although traditional Chinese Yijinjing Qigong Exercise (YJJQE) is popularly used in China, to alleviate symptoms of people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are available to evaluate the effects of YJJQE in patients with KOA. The purpose of this trial is to assess the clinical efficacy of YJJQE for patients with KOA. Methods: A total of 50 participants clinically diagnosed with KOA are randomly (1:1) assigned to the YJJQE group (n = 25) and to the stretching training exercise (STE) group (n = 25), for a 40-min exercise session twice a week for 12 weeks. All outcome measures are collected at baseline and at 12-week ending intervention, which includes the primary outcomes of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Scale (WOMAC), the secondary outcomes of visual analog scale (VAS), mental component summary (MCS), physical component summary (PCS), Beck depression inventory (BDI), perceived stress scale (PSS), Berg balance scale (BBS), and the Gait functional mobility data. Results: The YJJQE group did not have any significant changes compared to the control group on the WOMAC score after the 12-week intervention (P > 0.05), though the YJJQE group demonstrated better performance in MCS, BDI, and PSS (P = 0.002, P = 0.001, and P = 0.026, respectively) than the control group. No serious adverse events occurred in either group, and only mild muscle soreness was reported during both exercise treatments. Conclusion: Because no difference between both groups was shown, with regards to the primary outcome measurement (WOMAC), it can hardly explain that the YJJQE had an advantageous effect on patients experiencing the pain and dysfunction of knee osteoarthritis. However, compared to the control group, YJJQE appeared to be associated with improvements in psychological well-being including reduced stress, anxiety, depression, and mood disturbance to manage KOA. Further trials with larger sample sizes and follow-up studies will be required. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=60357&htm=4, ChiCTR2000037256.

Project description:BackgroundCurcuminoids (CURs) are the principal ingredients of Curcuma longa L. [Zingiberaceae] (CL)-an herbal plant used in east Asia to alleviate pain and inflammation. Thus far, the therapeutic effects of CURs for knee osteoarthritis (OA) uncovered by multiple reviews remained uncertain due to broadly involving trials with different agents-combined or CURs-free interventions. Therefore, we formed stringent selection criteria and assessment methods to summarize current evidence on the efficacy and safety of CURs alone in the treatment of knee OA.MethodsA series of databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of CURs for knee OA. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using meta-analysis and the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for both statistical and clinical significance.ResultsFifteen studies with 1670 patients were included. CURs were significantly more effective than placebo in the improvements of VAS for pain ( WMD: - 1.77, 95% CI: - 2.44 to - 1.09), WOMAC total score ( WMD: - 7.06, 95% CI: - 12.27 to - 1.84), WOMAC pain score ( WMD: - 1.42, 95% CI: - 2.41 to - 0.43), WOMAC function score ( WMD: - 5.04, 95% CI: - 7.65 to - 2.43), and WOMAC stiffness score ( WMD: - 0.54, 95% CI: - 1.03 to - 0.05). Meanwhile, CURs were not inferior to NSAIDs in the improvements of pain- and function-related outcomes. Additionally, CURs did not significantly increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) compared with placebo ( RR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.53, P = 0.899, I2 = 23.7%) and NSAIDs (RR: 0.71 0.65, 95% CI: 0.57 0.41 to 0.90 1.03).ConclusionsCURs alone can be expected to achieve considerable analgesic and functional promotion effects for patients with symptomatic knee OA in short term, without inducing an increase of adverse events. However, considering the low quality and substantial heterogeneity of present studies, a cautious and conservative recommendation for broader clinical use of CURs should still be made. Further high-quality studies are necessary to investigate the impact of different dosages, optimization techniques and administration approaches on long-term safety and efficacy of CURs, so as to strengthen clinical decision making for patients with symptomatic knee OA.

Dataset Information

Traditional Chinese Medications for Knee Osteoarthritis Pain: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets