Kitagawa Takashi, Isaji Yuichi, Sasaki Daisuke, Onishi Kunihiro, Hayashi Masateru, Okuyama Wataru
Department of Physical Therapy, Shinshu University, Matsumoto, Japan
Department of Physical Therapy, Bukkyo University, Kyoto, Japan.
BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 16;15(7):e093163. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093163.
This study aimed to assess the methodological quality of published systematic reviews of exercise therapy in knee osteoarthritis and summarise their reported effectiveness on quality of life, knee joint function, or adverse events.
Overview of systematic reviews.
PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and CENTRAL (searched on 14 April 2025), plus grey literature (PROSPERO, Epistemonikos, OpenGrey).
We included systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials in patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis by imaging or clinical criteria and treated conservatively with exercise therapy; we excluded reviews that enrolled patients scheduled for surgery, with acute inflammation or osteoarthritis of other joints (hand, hip, ankle), for which relevant author data could not be obtained after one contact attempt, or that did not report at least one primary outcome (quality of life, knee joint function or adverse events).
Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, interventions and outcomes, and assessed methodological quality using the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2) tool. Due to heterogeneity in outcome measures across systematic reviews, meta-analysis was not conducted. Effectiveness was defined as any reported beneficial outcome of exercise therapy on predefined outcomes, including quality of life, physical function, pain or adverse events.
58 systematic reviews were selected. Muscle-strengthening (74.1%) and aerobic (48.2%) exercises were the most commonly prescribed exercise-based interventions. SF-36 (36-Item Short Form Health Survey) and the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) were the most popular outcome-evaluation tools. Furthermore, 63.7% of the systematic reviews revealed that exercise therapy improved all outcomes. The number of intervention-related adverse events was small. Notably, almost all systematic reviews (87.4%) had a critically low quality.
Current evidence on exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis is inadequate. Nevertheless, exercise therapy can be considered for conservative treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Future studies should use network meta-analyses to compare the effects of different exercise therapies and determine their superiority over other conservative therapies.
本研究旨在评估已发表的关于膝关节骨关节炎运动疗法的系统评价的方法学质量,并总结其报告的对生活质量、膝关节功能或不良事件的有效性。
系统评价概述。
PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Web of Science和CENTRAL(于2025年4月14日检索),以及灰色文献(PROSPERO、Epistemonikos、OpenGrey)。
我们纳入了通过影像学或临床标准诊断为膝关节骨关节炎且接受运动疗法保守治疗的患者的随机对照试验的系统评价;我们排除了纳入计划进行手术的患者、患有其他关节(手、髋、踝)急性炎症或骨关节炎的患者的综述,对于这些患者,在一次联系尝试后无法获得相关作者数据,或者未报告至少一项主要结局(生活质量、膝关节功能或不良事件)的综述。
两名评价者独立提取关于研究特征、干预措施和结局的数据,并使用AMSTAR 2(评估系统评价的测量工具2)工具评估方法学质量。由于各系统评价的结局测量存在异质性,未进行荟萃分析。有效性定义为运动疗法对预定义结局(包括生活质量、身体功能、疼痛或不良事件)的任何报告的有益结局。
选择了58篇系统评价。肌肉强化(74.1%)和有氧运动(48.2%)是最常规定的基于运动的干预措施。SF-36(36项简短健康调查)和WOMAC(西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数)是最受欢迎的结局评估工具。此外,63.7%的系统评价表明运动疗法改善了所有结局。与干预相关的不良事件数量较少。值得注意的是,几乎所有系统评价(87.4%)的质量都极低。
目前关于膝关节骨关节炎运动疗法的证据不足。然而,运动疗法可考虑用于膝关节骨关节炎的保守治疗。未来的研究应使用网状荟萃分析来比较不同运动疗法的效果,并确定它们相对于其他保守疗法的优势。