Moyer Rebecca F, Birmingham Trevor B, Bryant Dianne M, Giffin J Robert, Marriott Kendal A, Leitch Kristyn M
University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2015 Apr;67(4):493-501. doi: 10.1002/acr.22472.
To evaluate the effects of valgus knee bracing on pain and function, and compliance and complications, in patients with medial knee osteoarthritis (OA).
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared changes in patient-reported pain and/or function in patients with medial knee OA was performed. Seven databases were searched from their inception to January 2014. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, rated risk of bias, and extracted data. Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for standardized mean differences (SMDs) for the improvement in pain (and function) were calculated. Event rates (proportions) were calculated for studies that reported complications.
Six studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, there was a statistically significant difference favoring the valgus brace group for improvement in pain (SMD 0.33 [95% CI 0.13, 0.52], P = 0.001) and function (SMD 0.22 [95% CI 0.02, 0.41], P = 0.03). When compared to a control group that did not use an orthosis, the effect size was moderate for pain (SMD 0.56 [95% CI 0.03, 1.09], P = 0.04) and function (SMD 0.48 [95% CI 0.02, 0.95], P = 0.04). When compared to a control group that used a control orthosis, only a small, statistically significant effect for pain remained (SMD 0.33 [95% CI 0.08, 0.58], P = 0.01). Instructions for brace use varied considerably and compliance ranged from 45% to 100%. Up to 25% of patients reported minor complications with brace use.
Meta-analysis of randomized trials suggests valgus bracing for medial knee OA results in small-to-moderate improvements in pain. Effect sizes vary based on study design and warrant future research.
评估外翻膝支具对膝内侧骨关节炎(OA)患者疼痛、功能、依从性及并发症的影响。
对比较膝内侧OA患者自我报告的疼痛和/或功能变化的随机对照试验进行荟萃分析。检索了7个数据库自建库至2014年1月的数据。两名评价者独立确定研究的纳入标准、评估偏倚风险并提取数据。计算疼痛(和功能)改善的标准化均数差值(SMD)的合并估计值和95%置信区间(95%CI)。对报告并发症的研究计算事件发生率(比例)。
荟萃分析纳入了6项研究。总体而言,外翻支具组在疼痛改善方面有统计学显著差异(SMD 0.33 [95%CI 0.13, 0.52],P = 0.001),在功能改善方面也有统计学显著差异(SMD 0.22 [95%CI 0.02, 0.41],P = 0.03)。与未使用矫形器的对照组相比,疼痛的效应量为中等(SMD 0.56 [95%CI 0.03, 1.09],P = 0.04),功能的效应量也为中等(SMD 0.48 [95%CI 0.02, 0.95],P = 0.04)。与使用对照矫形器的对照组相比,仅在疼痛方面存在小的、有统计学意义的效应(SMD 0.33 [95%CI 0.08, 0.58],P = 0.01)。支具使用说明差异很大,依从性范围为45%至100%。高达25%的患者报告使用支具出现轻微并发症。
随机试验的荟萃分析表明,膝内侧OA使用外翻支具可使疼痛有小到中等程度的改善。效应量因研究设计而异,值得未来进一步研究。