Oriental medicine as collaborating treatments with conventional treatments for knee osteoarthritis: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Park Yeon-Cheol12,Park Kyeong-Ju3ORCID,Goo Bon-Hyuk2,Kim Jung-Hyun2,Seo Byung-Kwan14,Baek Yong-Hyeon12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Acupuncture and Moxibustion, College of Korean Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

2. Joint Center, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Republic of Korea

3. Department of Clinical Korean Medicine, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

4. Spine Center, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Abstract

Background: We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oriental medicine (OM) treatments as monotherapy and add-on therapy compared to conventional treatments for knee osteoarthritis and assess the quality of evidence for these results. OM treatment included acupuncture, herbal medicine, pharmacoacupuncture, and moxibustion. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Google Scholar, 4 Korean medical databases (KoreaMed, Korean Studies Information Service System, Research Information Service System, and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System), and one Chinese database (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched for articles published between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of OM interventions, single or combined with conventional treatments, on knee osteoarthritis were searched. The risk of bias and quality of evidence of the included studies were evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methods, respectively. Results: A total of 3911 relevant studies were retrieved and only 23 studies were included for systematic review. Most of the studies showed a significant effect on knee osteoarthritis. 21 studies comparing single OM treatment with conventional treatment were included in the meta-analysis. The effect size of standardized mean difference (SMD) was analyzed as a “small effect” with 0.48 (95% CI −0.80 to −0.16, Z = 2.98, P = .003). In addition, a meta-analysis of 4 studies comparing integrative treatment with conventional treatment showed a “very large effect” with 1.52 (95% CI −2.09 to −0.95, Z = 5.19, P < .001). Conclusion: Our results suggest that single OM treatment and integrative treatment significantly reduce pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, there is a limited number of RCTs considering integrative treatment which implies more related RCTs should be conducted in the future.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3