8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for knee osteoarthritis : An overview of systematic reviews

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

          Abstract

          Background:

          Knee osteoarthritis (KOA), known as severe degenerative arthritis, commonly occurs in middle-aged and elderly people all over the world. Acupuncture as traditional oriental intervention is getting widely used and several systematic reviews (SRs) have reported the effectiveness of acupuncture on pain relief and functional recovery in patients with KOA.

          Objective:

          Conducting an overview of SRs to provide more reliable evidence-based medical references for clinical practitioners and researchers of the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture for KOA.

          Data sources:

          EMBASE, Medline, Web of science, the Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, China Biology Medicine, Wan Fang Digital Journals, and PROSPERO databases from inception to December 2018, magazines, websites, and unpublished sources.

          Selection criteria:

          Potential SRs were independently selected by 2 reviewers following a predetermined protocol.

          Data extraction:

          Data information of included SRs were independently extracted by 2 reviewers following a predetermined standardized data extraction form.

          Review appraisal:

          The risk of bias and reporting quality of included SRs were evaluated by the Risk of Bias in Systematic reviews (ROBIS) tool and the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The quality of evidence of outcomes was evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

          Results:

          A total of 12 SRs were included. All the SRs were published in recent 12 years, ranging from 2006 to 2017. According to ROBIS, 4 SRs were in low risk in domain 1 and 7 in domain 3 of phase 2, and 2 SRs were low risk in phase 3. Among 27 items of PRISMA, 19 items were reported over 70% of compliance. Using GRADE assessment, of 34 outcomes, high quality of evidence was found in 5 outcomes, 17 outcomes were rated moderate quality, and 11 outcomes were low quality. According to high-quality outcomes, acupuncture had more total effective rate, short-term effective rate, and less adverse reactions than western medicine in treating KOA. In terms of Lequesne index and Lysholm knee score scale score, the effectiveness of electroacupuncture was better than that of western medicine.

          Limitations:

          There might be missing information. There may be duplicated clinical trials included by each SR that might have impact on the synthetic findings.

          Conclusions:

          According to the high-quality evidence, we concluded that acupuncture may have some advantages in treating KOA. However, there are some risk of bias and reporting deficiencies still needed to be improved.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, Part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines.

          To develop concise, patient-focussed, up to date, evidence-based, expert consensus recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), which are adaptable and designed to assist physicians and allied health care professionals in general and specialist practise throughout the world. Sixteen experts from four medical disciplines (primary care, rheumatology, orthopaedics and evidence-based medicine), two continents and six countries (USA, UK, France, Netherlands, Sweden and Canada) formed the guidelines development team. A systematic review of existing guidelines for the management of hip and knee OA published between 1945 and January 2006 was undertaken using the validated appraisal of guidelines research and evaluation (AGREE) instrument. A core set of management modalities was generated based on the agreement between guidelines. Evidence before 2002 was based on a systematic review conducted by European League Against Rheumatism and evidence after 2002 was updated using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Library and HTA reports. The quality of evidence was evaluated, and where possible, effect size (ES), number needed to treat, relative risk or odds ratio and cost per quality-adjusted life years gained were estimated. Consensus recommendations were produced following a Delphi exercise and the strength of recommendation (SOR) for propositions relating to each modality was determined using a visual analogue scale. Twenty-three treatment guidelines for the management of hip and knee OA were identified from the literature search, including six opinion-based, five evidence-based and 12 based on both expert opinion and research evidence. Twenty out of 51 treatment modalities addressed by these guidelines were universally recommended. ES for pain relief varied from treatment to treatment. Overall there was no statistically significant difference between non-pharmacological therapies [0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16, 0.34] and pharmacological therapies (ES=0.39, 95% CI 0.31, 0.47). Following feedback from Osteoarthritis Research International members on the draft guidelines and six Delphi rounds consensus was reached on 25 carefully worded recommendations. Optimal management of patients with OA hip or knee requires a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological modalities of therapy. Recommendations cover the use of 12 non-pharmacological modalities: education and self-management, regular telephone contact, referral to a physical therapist, aerobic, muscle strengthening and water-based exercises, weight reduction, walking aids, knee braces, footwear and insoles, thermal modalities, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and acupuncture. Eight recommendations cover pharmacological modalities of treatment including acetaminophen, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) non-selective and selective oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), topical NSAIDs and capsaicin, intra-articular injections of corticosteroids and hyaluronates, glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulphate for symptom relief; glucosamine sulphate, chondroitin sulphate and diacerein for possible structure-modifying effects and the use of opioid analgesics for the treatment of refractory pain. There are recommendations covering five surgical modalities: total joint replacements, unicompartmental knee replacement, osteotomy and joint preserving surgical procedures; joint lavage and arthroscopic debridement in knee OA, and joint fusion as a salvage procedure when joint replacement had failed. Strengths of recommendation and 95% CIs are provided. Twenty-five carefully worded recommendations have been generated based on a critical appraisal of existing guidelines, a systematic review of research evidence and the consensus opinions of an international, multidisciplinary group of experts. The recommendations may be adapted for use in different countries or regions according to the availability of treatment modalities and SOR for each modality of therapy. These recommendations will be revised regularly following systematic review of new research evidence as this becomes available.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense

            Prospective registration of systematic reviews promotes transparency, helps reduce potential for bias and serves to avoid unintended duplication of reviews. Registration offers advantages to many stakeholders in return for modest additional effort from the researchers registering their reviews.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effectiveness of acupuncture as adjunctive therapy in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, controlled trial.

              Evidence on the efficacy of acupuncture for reducing the pain and dysfunction of osteoarthritis is equivocal. To determine whether acupuncture provides greater pain relief and improved function compared with sham acupuncture or education in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Randomized, controlled trial. Two outpatient clinics (an integrative medicine facility and a rheumatology facility) located in academic teaching hospitals and 1 clinical trials facility. 570 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee (mean age [+/-SD], 65.5 +/- 8.4 years). 23 true acupuncture sessions over 26 weeks. Controls received 6 two-hour sessions over 12 weeks or 23 sham acupuncture sessions over 26 weeks. Primary outcomes were changes in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and function scores at 8 and 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes were patient global assessment, 6-minute walk distance, and physical health scores of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Participants in the true acupuncture group experienced greater improvement in WOMAC function scores than the sham acupuncture group at 8 weeks (mean difference, -2.9 [95% CI, -5.0 to -0.8]; P = 0.01) but not in WOMAC pain score (mean difference, -0.5 [CI, -1.2 to 0.2]; P = 0.18) or the patient global assessment (mean difference, 0.16 [CI, -0.02 to 0.34]; P > 0.2). At 26 weeks, the true acupuncture group experienced significantly greater improvement than the sham group in the WOMAC function score (mean difference, -2.5 [CI, -4.7 to -0.4]; P = 0.01), WOMAC pain score (mean difference, -0.87 [CI, -1.58 to -0.16];P = 0.003), and patient global assessment (mean difference, 0.26 [CI, 0.07 to 0.45]; P = 0.02). At 26 weeks, 43% of the participants in the education group and 25% in each of the true and sham acupuncture groups were not available for analysis. Acupuncture seems to provide improvement in function and pain relief as an adjunctive therapy for osteoarthritis of the knee when compared with credible sham acupuncture and education control groups.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Medicine (Baltimore)
                Medicine (Baltimore)
                MEDI
                Medicine
                Wolters Kluwer Health
                0025-7974
                1536-5964
                July 2019
                12 July 2019
                : 98
                : 28
                : e16301
                Affiliations
                [a ]School of Health Preservation and Rehabilitation, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
                [b ]School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, The Third Affiliated Hospital, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, Sichuan
                [c ]Rehabilitation Department, Kunming Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Yunnan, China.
                Author notes
                []Correspondence: Rong-Jiang Jin, School of Health and Rehabilitation, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Sichuan, China (e-mail: cdzyydxjrj@ 123456126.com ); Fan-Rong Liang, School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, The Third Affiliated Hospital, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, Sichuan, China (e-mail: acuresearch@ 123456126.com ).
                Article
                MD-D-19-01992 16301
                10.1097/MD.0000000000016301
                6641846
                31305415
                6b59027e-8898-43c6-9799-28e88609d479
                Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

                History
                : 13 March 2019
                : 11 June 2019
                : 11 June 2019
                Categories
                3800
                Research Article
                Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                acupuncture,knee osteoarthritis,meta-analysis,overview,systematic review

                Comments

                Comment on this article