Adams Kyle R, Famuyide Ayodeji O, Young Jodi L, Maddox C Daniel, Rhon Daniel I
Physical Therapy Program, Bellin College, Green Bay, Wisconsin - USA.
Department of Physical Therapy, Baylor University, Waco, Texas - USA.
Arch Physiother. 2024 Feb 26;14:1-10. doi: 10.33393/aop.2024.2916. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
INTRODUCTION: Manual therapy is an often-utilized intervention for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA). The interpretation of results presented by these trials can be affected by how well the study designs align applicability to real-world clinical settings. AIM: To examine the existing body of clinical trials investigating manual therapy for knee OA to determine where they fall on the efficacy-effectiveness spectrum. METHODS: This systematic review has been guided and informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials that investigated manual therapy treatments for adults with knee OA were retrieved via searches of multiple databases to identify trials published prior to April 2023. The Rating of Included Trials on the Efficacy-Effectiveness Spectrum (RITES) tool was used to objectively rate the efficacy-effectiveness nature of each trial design. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 assessment tool (RoB-2) was used to assess the risk of bias across five domains. RESULTS: Of the 36 trials, a higher percentage of trials had a greater emphasis on efficacy within all four domains: participant characteristics (75.0%), trial setting (77.8%), flexibility of intervention (58.3%), and clinical relevance of experimental and comparison intervention (47.2%). In addition, 13.9% of the trials had low risk of bias, 41.7% had high risk of bias, and 44.4% had some concerns regarding bias. CONCLUSIONS: While many trials support manual therapy as effective for the management of knee OA, a greater focus on study designs with an emphasis on effectiveness would improve the applicability and generalizability of future trials.
引言:手法治疗是膝关节骨关节炎(OA)管理中常用的干预措施。这些试验结果的解读可能会受到研究设计与现实临床环境适用性匹配程度的影响。 目的:审查现有的关于手法治疗膝关节OA的临床试验,以确定它们在疗效 - 效果谱上的位置。 方法:本系统评价遵循系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行指导和参考。通过检索多个数据库,检索了针对成年膝关节OA患者研究手法治疗的随机对照试验,以识别2023年4月之前发表的试验。使用疗效 - 效果谱纳入试验评级(RITES)工具客观地评估每个试验设计的疗效 - 效果性质。使用Cochrane偏倚风险2.0评估工具(RoB - 2)评估五个领域的偏倚风险。 结果:在36项试验中,更高比例的试验在所有四个领域更强调疗效:参与者特征(75.0%)、试验环境(77.8%)、干预灵活性(58.3%)以及实验和对照干预的临床相关性(47.2%)。此外,13.9%的试验偏倚风险低,41.7%的试验偏倚风险高,44.4%的试验存在一些偏倚问题。 结论:虽然许多试验支持手法治疗对膝关节OA管理有效,但更多地关注强调效果的研究设计将提高未来试验的适用性和可推广性。
Arch Physiother. 2024-2-26
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
Early Hum Dev. 2020-11
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2024-1
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2005
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2005
Arch Physiother. 2024-10-21
J Clin Med. 2024-6-25
Orthop J Sports Med. 2023-6-5
Medicina (Kaunas). 2021-7-7
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2021-10