WITHDRAWN: Low level laser therapy (Classes III) for treating osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) affects a large portion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. LLLT was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for OA about 30 years ago, but its effectiveness has to be examined more closely, especially in the treatment of OA.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of class III LLLT for osteoarthritis when irradiation is directed at the osteoarthritic joint capsule.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches were conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Musculoskeletal registry, the Rehabilitation and Related Therapies field registry and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to May, 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Following an a prior protocol, only controlled clinical trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of OA were eligible. Abstracts lacking data were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials and extracted data using predetermined forms. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed; in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whereas the difference between the treatment and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treatment and control by the baseline variance, and were used in the analysis of pain because different scales were used to measure it. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with relative risk (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

Eight trials were included with 233 patients randomized to laser and 172 patients to placebo laser. Treatment duration ranged from two to six weeks. Pain was assessed in seven trials. When the results were pooled from different pain scales used in these seven trials, a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment was found with a SMD of -0.28 (95% CI: -0.48 to -0.09). One of these studies also measured pain during movement and found a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment with a WMD of -1.16 (95% CI: -2.02 to -0.30). Two studies found significant results for increased knee range of motion. Two others studies found a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment for patient-assessed global disease activity with laser compared to placebo (RR 1.70, 95%CI: 1.1. to 2.63). One trial evaluated the effectiveness of laser treatment in temporomandibular joint OA and found a statistically significant difference (WMD 38.69, 95% CI: 29.25 to 48.13) using the change in VAS score to measure pain. One study found a statistically significant difference in favor of laser treatment at the end of treatment and at 4 and 8 weeks post-treatment for morning stiffness. Other outcome measures of joint tenderness and strength did not yield significant differences.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Five trials included in this review showed a statistically significant difference favoring laser treatment when compared to placebo for at least one outcome measure. Three trials did not report beneficial effects. The varying results of these trials may be due to the method of laser application and/or other features of LLLT application. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of LLLT devices and application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of different dosages on LLLT effectiveness for OA in future randomized, controlled clinical trials. Also, more studies should be done to investigate the anti-inflammatory action of laser as well as the appropriate parameters needed to achieve an anti-inflammatory effect.

WITHDRAWN: Calcium supplementation on bone loss in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Although calcium is one the simplest and least expensive strategies for preventing osteoporotic fractures calcium supplementation is nevertheless not without controversy (Kanis 1989; Nordin 1990). The Food and Drug Administration in the US has permitted a bone health claim for calcium-rich foods, and the NIH in its Consensus Development Process approved a statement that high calcium intake reduces the risk of osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of calcium on bone density and fractures in postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Controlled Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 2001, and examined citations of relevant articles and proceedings of international meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials that randomized postmenopausal women to calcium supplementation or usual calcium intake in the diet and reported bone mineral density of the total body, vertebral spine, hip, or forearm or recorded the number of fractures, and followed patients for at least one year were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality and extracted data for each trial. For each bone density site (lumbar spine, total body, combined hip and combined forearm), we calculated the weighted mean difference in bone density between treatment and control groups using the percentage change from baseline. We constructed regression models in which the independent variables were year and dose, and the dependent variable was the effect size. This regression was used to determine the years across which pooling was appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed. For each fracture analysis we calculated a risk ratio.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials, representing 1806 participants, were included. Calcium was more effective than placebo in reducing rates of bone loss after two or more years of treatment. The pooled difference in percentage change from baseline was 2.05% (95% CI 0.24 to 3.86) for total body bone density, 1.66% (95% CI 0.92 to 2.39) for the lumbar spine at 2 years, 1.60% (95% CI 0.78 to 2.41) for the hip, and 1.91% (95% CI 0.33 to 3.50) for the distal radius. The relative risk of fractures of the vertebrae was 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.09); the relative risk for non-vertebral fractures was 0.86 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.72).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Calcium supplementation alone has a small positive effect on bone density. The data show a trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures, but it is unclear if calcium reduces the incidence of non vertebral fractures.

School feeding for improving the physical and psychosocial health of disadvantaged elementary school children

BACKGROUND

Early malnutrition and/or micronutrient deficiencies can adversely affect physical, mental, and social aspects of child health. School feeding programs are designed to improve attendance, achievement, growth, and other health outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to determine the effectiveness of school feeding programs in improving physical and psychosocial health for disadvantaged school children.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched a number of databases including CENTRAL (2006 Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2006), EMBASE (1980 to May 2006), PsycINFO (1980 to May 2006) and CINAHL (1982 to May 2006). Grey literature sources were also searched. Reference lists of included studies and key journals were handsearched and we also contacted selected experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time series studies (ITSs) were included. Feeding had to be done in school; the majority of participants had to be socio-economically disadvantaged.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed all searches and retrieved studies. Data extraction was done by one of four reviewers and reviewed by a second. Two reviewers independently rated quality. If sufficient data were available, they were synthesized using random effects meta-analysis, adjusting for clustering if needed. Analyses were performed separately for RCTs and CBAs and for higher and lower income countries.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies. For weight, in the RCTs and CBAs from Lower Income Countries, experimental group children gained an average of 0.39 kg (95% C.I: 0.11 to 0.67) over an average of 19 months and 0.71 kg (95% C.I.: 0.48 to 0.95) over 11.3 months respectively. Results for weight were mixed in higher income countries. For height, results were mixed; height gain was greater for younger children. Attendance in lower income countries was higher in experimental groups than in controls; our results show an average increase of 4 to 6 days a year. Math gains were consistently higher for experimental groups in lower income countries; in CBAs, the Standardized Mean Difference was 0.66 (95% C.I. = 0.13 to 1.18). In short-term studies, small improvements in some cognitive tasks were found.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

School meals may have some small benefits for disadvantaged children. We recommend further well-designed studies on the effectiveness of school meals be undertaken, that results should be reported according to socio-economic status, and that researchers gather robust data on both processes and carefully chosen outcomes.

Health Research Profile to assess the capacity of low and middle income countries for equity-oriented research

BACKGROUND

The Commission on Health Research for Development concluded that "for the most vulnerable people, the benefits of research offer a potential for change that has gone largely untapped." This project was designed to assess low and middle income country capacity and commitment for equity-oriented research.

METHODS

A multi-disciplinary team with coordinators from each of four regions (Asia, Latin America, Africa and Central and Eastern Europe) developed a questionnaire through consensus meetings using a mini-Delphi technique. Indicators were selected based on their quality, validity, comprehensiveness, feasibility and relevance to equity. Indicators represented five categories that form the Health Research Profile (HRP): 1) Research priorities; 2) Resources (amount spent on research); 3) Production of knowledge (capacity); 4) Packaging of knowledge and 5) Evidence of research impact on policy and equity. We surveyed three countries from each region.

RESULTS

Most countries reported explicit national health research priorities. Of these, half included specific research priorities to address inequities in health. Data on financing were lacking for most countries due to inadequate centralized collection of this information. The five main components of HRP showed a gradient where countries scoring lower on the Human Development Index (HDI) had a lower capacity to conduct research to meet local health research needs. Packaging such as peer-reviewed journals and policy forums were reported by two thirds of the countries. Seven out of 12 countries demonstrated impact of health research on policies and reported engagement of stakeholders in this process.

CONCLUSION

Only one out of 12 countries indicated there was research on all fronts of the equity debate. Knowledge sharing and management is needed to strengthen within-country capacity for research and implementation to reduce inequities in health. We recommend that all countries (and external agencies) should invest more in building a certain minimum level of national capacity for equity-oriented research.

Assessing the welfare of genetically altered mice

In 2003, under the auspices of the main UK funders of biological and biomedical research, a working group was established with a remit to review potential welfare issues for genetically altered (GA) mice, to summarize current practice, and to recommend contemporary best practice for welfare assessments. The working group has produced a report which makes practical recommendations for GA mouse welfare assessment and dissemination of welfare information between establishments using a 'mouse passport'. The report can be found at www.nc3rs.org.uk/GAmice and www.lal.org.uk/gaa and includes templates for the recommended welfare assessment scheme and the mouse passport. An overview is provided below.

Viscosupplementation for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent chronic joint disorder worldwide and is associated with significant pain and disability.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of viscosupplementation in the treatment of OA of the knee. The products were hyaluronan and hylan derivatives (Adant, Arthrum H, Artz (Artzal, Supartz), BioHy (Arthrease, Euflexxa, Nuflexxa), Durolane, Fermathron, Go-On, Hyalgan, Hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc Hylan G-F 20), Hyruan, NRD-101 (Suvenyl), Orthovisc, Ostenil, Replasyn, SLM-10, Suplasyn, Synject and Zeel compositum).

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE (up to January (week 1) 2006 for update), EMBASE, PREMEDLINE, Current Contents up to July 2003, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched. Specialised journals and reference lists of identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and pertinent review articles up to December 2005 were handsearched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of viscosupplementation for the treatment of people with a diagnosis of OA of the knee were eligible. Single and double-blinded studies, placebo-based and comparative studies were eligible. At least one of the four OMERACT III core set outcome measures had to be reported (Bellamy 1997).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each trial was assessed independently by two reviewers for its methodological quality using a validated tool. All data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer . Continuous outcome measures were analysed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). However, where different scales were used to measure the same outcome, standardized mean differences (SMD) were used. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed by relative risk (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-six trials with a median quality score of 3 (range 1 to 5) were identified. Follow-up periods varied between day of last injection and eighteen months. Forty trials included comparisons of hyaluronan/hylan and placebo (saline or arthrocentesis), ten trials included comparisons of intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, six trials included comparisons of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), three trials included comparisons of physical therapy, two trials included comparisons of exercise, two trials included comparisons of arthroscopy, two trials included comparisons of conventional treatment, and fifteen trials included comparisons of other hyaluronans/hylan. The pooled analyses of the effects of viscosupplements against 'placebo' controls generally supported the efficacy of this class of intervention. In these same analyses, differential efficacy effects were observed for different products on different variables and at different timepoints. Of note is the 5 to 13 week post injection period which showed a percent improvement from baseline of 28 to 54% for pain and 9 to 32% for function. In general, comparable efficacy was noted against NSAIDs and longer-term benefits were noted in comparisons against IA corticosteroids. In general, few adverse events were reported in the hyaluronan/hylan trials included in these analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the aforementioned analyses, viscosupplementation is an effective treatment for OA of the knee with beneficial effects: on pain, function and patient global assessment; and at different post injection periods but especially at the 5 to 13 week post injection period. It is of note that the magnitude of the clinical effect, as expressed by the WMD and standardised mean difference (SMD) from the RevMan 4.2 output, is different for different products, comparisons, timepoints, variables and trial designs. However, there are few randomised head-to-head comparisons of different viscosupplements and readers should be cautious, therefore, in drawing conclusions regarding the relative value of different products. The clinical effect for some products, against placebo, on some variables at some timepoints is in the moderate to large effect-size range. Readers should refer to relevant tables to review specific detail given the heterogeneity in effects across the product class and some discrepancies observed between the RevMan 4.2 analyses and the original publications. Overall, the analyses performed are positive for the HA class and particularly positive for some products with respect to certain variables and timepoints, such as pain on weight bearing at 5 to 13 weeks postinjection. In general, sample-size restrictions preclude any definitive comment on the safety of the HA class of products; however, within the constraints of the trial designs employed no major safety issues were detected. In some analyses viscosupplements were comparable in efficacy to systemic forms of active intervention, with more local reactions but fewer systemic adverse events. In other analyses HA products had more prolonged effects than IA corticosteroids. Overall, the aforementioned analyses support the use of the HA class of products in the treatment of knee OA.

Intraarticular corticosteroid for treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common joint disorder. In the knee, injections of corticosteroids into the joint (intraarticular (IA)) may relieve inflammation, and reduce pain and disability.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of IA corticosteroids in treatment of OA of the knee.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (to January (week 1) 2006 for update), EMBASE, PREMEDLINE (all to July 2003), and Current Contents (Sept 2000). Specialised journals, trial reference lists and review articles were handsearched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of IA corticosteroids for patients with OA of the knee: single/double blind, placebo-based/comparative studies, reporting at least one core OMERACT III outcome measure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Methodological quality of trials was assessed, and data were extracted in duplicate. Fixed effect and random effects models, giving weighted mean differences (WMD), were used for continuous variables. Dichotomous outcomes were analysed by relative risk (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials (1973 participants) comparing IA corticosteroid against placebo, against IA hyaluronan/hylan (HA products), against joint lavage, and against other IA corticosteroids, were included.IA corticosteroid was more effective than IA placebo for pain reduction (WMD -21.91; 95% confidence interval (CI) -29.93 to -13.89) and patient global assessment (the RR was 1.44 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.82)) at one week post injection with an NNT of 3 to 4 for both, based on n=185 for pain on 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and n=158 for patient global assessment. Data on function were sparse at one week post injection and neither statistically significant nor clinically important differences were detected. There was evidence of pain reduction between two weeks (the RR was 1.81 (95% CI 1.09 to 3.00)) to three weeks (the RR was 3.11 (95% CI 1.61 to 6.01), but a lack of evidence for efficacy in functional improvement. At four to 24 weeks post injection, there was lack of evidence of effect on pain and function (small studies showed benefits which did not reach statistical or clinical importance, i.e. less than 20% risk difference). For patient global, there were three studies which consistently showed lack of effect longer than one week post injection. However, all were fairly small sample sizes (less than 50 patients per group). This was supported by another study which did not find statistically significant differences, at any time point, on a continuous measure of patient global assessment (100 mm VAS).In comparisons of corticosteroids and HA products, no statistically significant differences were in general detected at one to four weeks post injection. Between five and 13 weeks post injection, HA products were more effective than corticosteroids for one or more of the following variables: WOMAC OA Index, Lequesne Index, pain, range of motion (flexion), and number of responders. One study showed a difference in function between 14 to 26 weeks, but no differences in efficacy were detected at 45 to 52 weeks. In general, the onset of effect was similar with IA corticosteroids, but was less durable than with HA products. Comparisons of IA corticosteroids showed triamcinolone hexacetonide was superior to betamethasone for number of patients reporting pain reduction up to four weeks post injection (the RR was 2.00 (95% CI 1.10 to 3.63). Comparisons between IA corticosteroid and joint lavage showed no differences in any of the efficacy or safety outcome measures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The short-term benefit of IA corticosteroids in treatment of knee OA is well established, and few side effects have been reported. Longer term benefits have not been confirmed based on the RevMan analysis. The response to HA products appears more durable. In this review, some discrepancies were observed between the RevMan 4.2 analysis and the original publication. These are likely the result of using secondary rather than primary data and the statistical methods available in RevMan 4.2. Future trials should have standardised outcome measures and assessment times, run longer, investigate different patient subgroups, and clinical predictors of response (those associated with inflammation and structural damage).

Low level laser therapy (Classes I, II and III) for treating rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for RA about ten years ago. LLLT is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. The effectiveness of LLLT for rheumatoid arthritis is still controversial. This review is an update of the original review published in October 1998.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We initially searched MEDLINE, EMBASE (from 1998), the registries of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group and the field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies as well as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to June 2001. This search has now been updated to include articles published up to June 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Following an a priori protocol, only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion, then extracted data and assessed quality using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested using chi-squared. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with relative risks.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 222 patients were included in the five placebo-controlled trials, with 130 randomized to laser therapy. Relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 1.10 points (95% CI: 1.82, 0.39) on visual analogue scale relative to placebo, reduced morning stiffness duration by 27.5 minutes (95%CI: 2.9 to 52 minutes) and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI: 0.8 to 1.7). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion and local swelling did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application or treatment length. For RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference observed between the control and treatment hand for morning stiffness duration, and also no significant improvement in pain relief RR 13.00 (95% CI: 0.79 to 214.06). However, only one study was included as using the contralateral limb as control. .

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

LLLT could be considered for short-term treatment for relief of pain and morning stiffness for RA patients, particularly since it has few side-effects. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of these factors on LLLT effectiveness for RA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic low-back pain

BACKGROUND

Chronic low-back pain (LBP) affects a significant proportion of the population. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) was introduced more than 30 years ago as an adjunct to the pharmacological management of pain. However, despite its widespread use, the usefulness of TENS in chronic LBP is still controversial.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness of TENS in the management of chronic LBP.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE, EMBASE and PEDro up to April 1, 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of TENS on chronic LBP were included. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials and extracted data using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested with Cochrane's Q test. A fixed effect model was used throughout for calculating continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results are presented as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between the treated and control by the baseline variance. SMD were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with odds ratios.

MAIN RESULTS

The only two RCTs (175 patients) meeting eligibility criteria differed in study design, methodological quality, inclusion and exclusion criteria, type and method of TENS application, treatment schedule, co-interventions and final outcomes. In one RCT, TENS produced significantly greater pain relief than the placebo control. However, in the other RCT, no statistically significant differences between treatment and control groups were shown for multiple outcome measures. Pre-planned subgroup analyses, intended to examine the impact of different stimulation parameters, sites of TENS application, treatment durations and baseline patient characteristics were not possible due to the small number of included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is inconsistent evidence to support the use of TENS as a single treatment in the management of chronic LBP. Larger, multi-center, randomized controlled trials are needed to better assess the true effectiveness of TENS. Special attention should be given to the risks and benefits of long-term use, which more appropriately addresses the realities of managing chronic low-back pain.

Glucosamine therapy for treating osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis, and it is often associated with significant disability and an impaired quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness and toxicity of glucosamine in OA.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, ACP Journal Club, DARE, CDSR, and the CCTR. We also wrote letters to content experts, and hand searched reference lists of identified RCTs and pertinent review articles. All searches were updated in January 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Relevant studies met the following criteria: 1) RCTs evaluating the effectiveness and safety of glucosamine in OA, 2) Both placebo controlled and comparative studies were eligible, 3) Both single blinded and double blinded studies were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data abstraction was performed independently by two investigators and the results were compared for degree of agreement. Gotzsche's method and a validated tool (Jadad 1996) were used to score the quality of the RCTs. Continuous outcome measures were pooled using standardized mean differences (SMD) as the measure of effect size. Dichotomous outcome measures were pooled using relative risk ratios (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

Analysis restricted to eight studies with adequate allocation concealment failed to show benefit of glucosamine for pain and WOMAC function. Collectively, the 20 analyzed RCTs found glucosamine favoured placebo with a 28% (change from baseline) improvement in pain (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.95, -0.28) and a 21% (change from baseline) improvement in function using the Lequesne index (SMD -0.51 95% CI -0.96, -0.05). However, the results are not uniformly positive, and the reasons for this remain unexplained. WOMAC pain, function and stiffness outcomes did not reach statistical significance. In the 10 RCTs in which the Rotta preparation of glucosamine was compared to placebo, glucosamine was found to be superior for pain (SMD -1.31, 95% CI -1.99, -0.64) and function using the Lequesne index (SMD -0.51, 95% CI -0.96, -0.05). Pooled results for pain (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.35, 0.05) and function using the WOMAC index (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.18, 0.25) in those RCTs in which a non-Rotta preparation of glucosamine was compared to placebo did not reach statistical significance. In the four RCTs in which the Rotta preparation of glucosamine was compared to an NSAID, glucosamine was superior in two, and equivalent in two. Two RCTs using the Rotta preparation showed that glucosamine was able to slow radiological progression of OA of the knee over a three year period (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.04, 0.43). Glucosamine was as safe as placebo in terms of the number of subjects reporting adverse reactions (RR=0.97, 95% CI, 0.88, 1.08).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update includes 20 studies with 2570 patients. Pooled results from studies using a non-Rotta preparation or adequate allocation concealment failed to show benefit in pain and WOMAC function while those studies evaluating the Rotta preparation show that glucosamine was superior to placebo in the treatment of pain and functional impairment resulting from symptomatic OA. WOMAC outcomes of pain, stiffness and function did not show a superiority of glucosamine over placebo for both Rotta and non-Rotta preparations of glucosamine. Glucosamine was as safe as placebo.

Intraarticular corticosteroid for treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common joint disorder. In the knee, injections of corticosteroids into the joint (intra-articular (IA)) may relieve inflammation, and reduce pain and disability.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of IA corticosteroids in treatment of OA of the knee.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PREMEDLINE (all to July 2003), and Current Contents (Sept 2000). Specialised journals, trial reference lists and review articles were handsearched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of IA corticosteroids for patients with OA of the knee: single/double blind, placebo-based/comparative studies, reporting at least one core OMERACT III outcome measure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Methodological quality of trials was assessed, and data were extracted in duplicate. Fixed effect and random effects models, giving weighted mean differences (WMD), were used for continuous variables. Dichotomous outcomes were analysed by relative risk (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six trials (1721 participants) comparing IA corticosteroid against placebo, against IA hyaluronan/hylan (HA products), against joint lavage, and against other IA corticosteroids, were included.IA corticosteroid was more effective than IA placebo for pain reduction (WMD -17.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) -25.02 to -10.55) and patient global assessment (the RR was 1.44 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.82)) at one week post injection with an NNT of 3 to 4 for both, based on n=185 for pain on 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and n=158 for patient global assessment. Data on function were sparse at one week post injection and neither statistically significant nor clinically important differences were detected. There was evidence of pain reduction between two weeks (the RR was 1.81 (95% CI 1.09 to 3.00)) to three weeks (the RR was 3.11 (95% CI 1.61 to 6.01), but a lack of evidence for efficacy in functional improvement. At four to 24 weeks post injection, there was lack of evidence of effect on pain and function (small studies showed benefits which did not reach statistical or clinical importance, i.e. less than 20% risk difference). For patient global, there were three studies which consistently showed lack of effect longer than one week post injection. However, all were fairly small sample sizes (less than 50 patients per group). This was supported by another study which did not find statistically significant differences, at any time point, on a continuous measure of patient global assessment (100 mm VAS). In comparisons of corticosteroids and HA products, no statistically significant differences were in general detected at one to four weeks post injection. Between five and 13 weeks post injection, HA products were more effective than corticosteroids for one or more of the following variables: WOMAC OA Index, Lequesne Index, pain, range of motion (flexion), and number of responders. One study showed a difference in function between 14 to 26 weeks, but no differences in efficacy were detected at 45 to 52 weeks. In general, the onset of effect was similar with IA corticosteroids, but was less durable than with HA products. Comparisons of IA corticosteroids showed triamcinolone hexacetonide was superior to betamethasone for number of patients reporting pain reduction up to four weeks post injection (the RR was 2.00 (95% CI 1.10 to 3.63). Comparisons between IA corticosteroid and joint lavage showed no differences in any of the efficacy or safety outcome measures.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The short-term benefit of IA corticosteroids in treatment of knee OA is well established, and few side effects have been reported. Longer term benefits have not been confirmed based on the RevMan analysis. The response to HA products appears more durable. In this review, some discrepancies were observed between the RevMan 4.1 analysis and the original publication. These are likely the result of using secondary rather than primary data and the statistical methods available in RevMan 4.1. Future trials should have standardised outcome measures and assessment times, run longer, investigate different patient subgroups, and clinical predictors of response (those associated with inflammation and structural damage).

Viscosupplementation for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent chronic joint disorder worldwide and is associated with significant pain and disability.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of viscosupplementation in the treatment of OA of the knee. The products were hyaluronan and hylan derivatives (Adant, Arthrum H, Artz (Artzal, Supartz), BioHy (Arthrease), Durolane, Fermathron, Go-On, Hyalgan, Hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc Hylan G-F 20), NRD-101, Orthovisc, Ostenil, Replasyn, SLM-10, Suplasyn, Synject and Zeel compositum).

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PREMEDLINE, Current Contents up to July 2003, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched. Specialised journals and reference lists of identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and pertinent review articles up to April 2004 were handsearched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of viscosupplementation for the treatment of people with a diagnosis of OA of the knee were eligible. Single and double-blinded studies, placebo-based and comparative studies were eligible. At least one of the four OMERACT III core set outcome measures had to be reported (Bellamy 1997).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each trial was assessed independently by two reviewers (NB, JC) for its methodological quality using a validated tool. All data were extracted by one reviewer (JC) and verified by a second reviewer (VR). Continuous outcome measures were analysed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed by relative risk (RR).

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-three trials with a median quality score of 3 (range 1 to 5) were identified. Follow-up periods varied between day of last injection and one year. Thirty-seven trials included comparisons of hyaluronan/hylan and placebo, nine trials included comparisons of intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, and five trials included comparisons of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The pooled analyses of the effects of viscosupplements against 'placebo' controls generally supported the efficacy of this class of intervention. In these same analyses, differential efficacy effects were observed for different products on different variables and at different timepoints. Of note is the 5 to 13 week post injection period which showed a percent improvement from baseline of 11 to 54% for pain and 9 to 15% for function. In general, comparable efficacy was noted against NSAIDs and longer-term benefits were noted in comparisons against IA corticosteroids. In general, few adverse events were reported in the hyaluronan/hylan trials included in these analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the aforementioned analyses, viscosupplementation is an effective treatment for OA of the knee with beneficial effects: on pain, function and patient global assessment; and at different post injection periods but especially at the 5 to 13 week post injection period. It is of note that based on non-randomised groups, the magnitude of the clinical effect, as expressed by the WMD and standardised mean difference (SMD) from the RevMan 4.1 output, is different for different products, comparisons, timepoints, variables and trial designs. However, there are few randomised head-to-head comparisons of different viscosupplements and readers should be cautious, therefore, in drawing conclusions regarding the relative value of different products. The clinical effect for some products, against placebo, on some variables at some timepoints is in the moderate to large effect-size range. Readers should refer to relevant tables to review specific detail given the heterogeneity in effects across the product class and some discrepancies observed between the RevMan 4.1 analyses and the original publications. Overall, the analyses performed are positive for the HA class and particularly positive for some products with respect to certain variables and timepoints, such as pain on weight bearing at 5 to 13 weeks postinjection. In general, sample-size restrictions preclude any definitive comment on the safety of the HA class of products; however, within the constraints of the trial designs employed no major safety issues were detected. In some analyses viscosupplements were comparable in efficacy to systemic forms of active intervention, with more local reactions but fewer systemic adverse events. In other analyses HA products had more prolonged effects than IA corticosteroids. Overall, the aforementioned analyses support the use of the HA class of products in the treatment of knee OA.

Neural crest and the origin of ectomesenchyme: neural fold heterogeneity suggests an alternative hypothesis

The striking similarity between mesodermally derived fibroblasts and ectomesenchyme cells, which are thought to be derivatives of the neural crest, has long been a source of interest and controversy. In mice, the gene encoding the alpha subunit of the platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFRalpha) is expressed both by mesodermally derived mesenchymal cells and by ectomesenchyme. Whole-mount immunostaining previously revealed that PDGFRalpha is present in the cephalic neural fold epithelium of early murine embryos (Takakura et al. [1997] J Histochem Cytochem 45:883-893). We now show that, within the neural fold, a sharp boundary exists between E-cadherin-expressing non-neural epithelium and the neural epithelium of the dorsal ridge. In addition, we found that cells coexpressing E-cadherin and PDGFRalpha are present in the non-neural epithelium of the neural folds. These observations raise the possibility that at least some PDGFRalpha(+) ectomesenchyme originates from the lateral non-neural domain of neural fold epithelium. This inference is consistent with previous reports (Nichols [ 1981] J Embryol Exp Morphol 64:105-120; Nichols [ 1986] Am J Anat 176:221-231) that mesenchymal cells emerge precociously from an epithelial neural fold domain resembling the primitive streak in the early embryonic epiblast. Therefore, we propose the name "metablast" for this non-neural epithelial domain to indicate that it is the site of a delayed local delamination of mesenchyme similar to involution of mesoderm during gastrulation. We further propose the testable hypothesis that neural crest and ectomesenchyme are developmentally distinct progenitor populations and that at least some ectomesenchyme is metablast-derived rather than neural crest-derived tissue. Developmental Dynamics 229:118-130, 2004.

Calcium supplementation on bone loss in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Although calcium is one the simplest and least expensive strategies for preventing osteoporotic fractures calcium supplementation is nevertheless not without controversy (Kanis 1989; Nordin 1990). The Food and Drug Administration in the US has permitted a bone health claim for calcium-rich foods, and the NIH in its Consensus Development Process approved a statement that high calcium intake reduces the risk of osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of calcium on bone density and fractures in postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Controlled Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 2001, and examined citations of relevant articles and proceedings of international meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials that randomized postmenopausal women to calcium supplementation or usual calcium intake in the diet and reported bone mineral density of the total body, vertebral spine, hip, or forearm or recorded the number of fractures, and followed patients for at least one year were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality and extracted data for each trial. For each bone density site (lumbar spine, total body, combined hip and combined forearm), we calculated the weighted mean difference in bone density between treatment and control groups using the percentage change from baseline. We constructed regression models in which the independent variables were year and dose, and the dependent variable was the effect size. This regression was used to determine the years across which pooling was appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed. For each fracture analysis we calculated a risk ratio.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials, representing 1806 participants, were included. Calcium was more effective than placebo in reducing rates of bone loss after two or more years of treatment. The pooled difference in percentage change from baseline was 2.05% (95% CI 0.24 to 3.86) for total body bone density, 1.66% (95% CI 0.92 to 2.39) for the lumbar spine at 2 years, 1.60% (95% CI 0.78 to 2.41) for the hip, and 1.91% (95% CI 0.33 to 3.50) for the distal radius. The relative risk of fractures of the vertebrae was 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.09); the relative risk for non-vertebral fractures was 0.86 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.72).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Calcium supplementation alone has a small positive effect on bone density. The data show a trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures, but it is unclear if calcium reduces the incidence of non vertebral fractures.

Tai chi for treating rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic inflammatory autoimmune disease that results in the destruction of the musculoskeletal system. The major goals of treatment are to relieve pain, reduce inflammation, slow down or stop joint damage, prevent disability, and preserve or improve the person's sense of well-being and ability to function. Tai Chi, interchangeably known as Tai Chi Chuan, is an ancient Chinese health-promoting martial art form that has been recognized in China as an effective arthritis therapy for centuries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of Tai Chi as a treatment for people with RA.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR), MEDLINE, Pedro and CINAHL databases up to September 2002, using the Cochrane Collaboration search strategy for randomised controlled trials. We also searched the Chinese Biomedical Database up to December 2003 and the Beijing Chinese Academy of Traditional Medicine up to December 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials examining the benefits and harms of exercise programs with Tai Chi instruction or incorporating principles of Tai Chi philosophy were selected. We included control groups who received no therapy, sham therapy or another type of therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers determined the studies to be included in this review, rated the methodological quality and extracted data using standardized forms.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials including 206 participants, were included in this review. Tai Chi-based exercise programs had no clinically important or statistically significant effect on most outcomes of disease activity, which included activities of daily living, tender and swollen joints and patient global overall rating. For range of motion, Tai Chi participants had statistically significant and clinically important improvements in ankle plantar flexion. No detrimental effects were found. One study found that compared to people who participated in traditional ROM exercise/rest programs those in a Tai Chi dance program reported a significantly higher level of participation in and enjoyment of exercise both immediately and four months after completion of the Tai Chi program.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest Tai Chi does not exacerbate symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis. In addition, Tai Chi has statistically significant benefits on lower extremity range of motion, in particular ankle range of motion, for people with RA. The included studies did not assess the effects on patient-reported pain.

Number needed to treat (NNT): implication in rheumatology clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) from the data in rheumatology clinical trials and systematic reviews.

METHODS

The NNTs for the clinically important outcome measures in the rheumatology systematic reviews from the Cochrane Library, issue 2, 2000 and in the original randomised, double blind, controlled trials were calculated. The measure used for calculating the NNT in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) interventions was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement or Paulus criteria; in osteoarthritis (OA) interventions, the improvement of pain; and in systemic sclerosis (SSc) interventions, the improvement of Raynaud's phenomenon. The NNH was calculated from the rate of withdrawals due to adverse events from the treatment.

RESULTS

The data required for the calculation of the NNT were available in 15 systematic reviews and 11 original articles. For RA interventions, etanercept treatment for six months had the smallest NNT (1.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4 to 2.0), whereas leflunomide had the largest NNH (9.6; 95% CI 6.8 to 16.7). For OA treatment options, only etodolac and tenoxicam produced significant pain relief compared with placebo (NNT=4.4; 95% CI 2.4 to 24.4 and 3.8; 95% CI 2.5 to 7.3, respectively). For SSc interventions, none were shown to be efficacious in improving Raynaud's phenomenon because the 95% CI of the NNT was infinite.

CONCLUSIONS

The NNT and NNH are helpful for clinicians, enabling them to translate the results from clinical trials and systematic reviews to use in routine clinical practice. Both NNT and NNH should be accompanied by a limited 95% CI and adjusted for the individual subject's baseline risk.

Risedronate for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis

BACKGROUND

Postmenopausal osteoporosis results in an increased susceptibility to low-trauma fractures due to reduced bone volume and microarchitectural deterioration. Risedronate, a third generation bisphosphonate, has been shown in multiple clinical trials to reduce fracture risk and improve bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. First and second generation bisphosphonates are known to have gastrointestinal side-effects and risedronate may be better tolerated.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the efficacy of risedronate on bone density, and fracture reduction in postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry Medline, and Current Contents were searched from 1990 - 2001. The electronic search was supplemented by handsearching four osteoporosis journals and their conference proceedings, as well as contacting content experts and industry sources for unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included eight trials that randomised women to risedronate or an alternative (placebo or calcium and /or vitamin D) and measured bone mineral density for at least one year.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each trial three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality and abstracted data. Data was extracted for outcomes of fracture, bone mineral density and adverse events. The more conservative random effects model was used to pool data. The quality of trials was assessed according to the Jadad five-point scale.

MAIN RESULTS

Both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures were statistically and clinically reduced with risedronate. Eleven out of one hundred women who received risedronate had a vertebral fracture compared to 17 out of one hundred of those who received an alternative treatment (pooled relative risk for vertebral fractures of 0.64 (95% CI 0.52 - 0.77). Three percent of participants who received risedronate had a non-vertebral fracture compared to 4.6% of those who received an alternative treatment (pooled relative risk for nonvertebral fractures of 0.73 (95% CI 0.61 - 0.87). The weighted mean difference for the percent change from baseline for bone mineral density with 5 mg daily for lumbar spine, femoral neck and trochanter was 4.54% (95%CI 4.12 - 4.97), p<0.01; 2.75% (95% CI 2.32 - 3.17), p<0.01; and 4.38% (95% CI 3.51 - 5.25), p<0.01 respectively.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is good evidence for the efficacy of risedronate in the reduction of both vertebral and non-vertebral fractures. In addition, there is evidence from randomized trials that risedronate is able to achieve this without increasing risk for overall withdrawals due to adverse effects.

Calcium supplementation on bone loss in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Although calcium is one the simplest and least expensive strategies for preventing osteoporotic fractures calcium supplementation is nevertheless not without controversy (Kanis 1989; Nordin 1990). The Food and Drug Administration in the US has permitted a bone health claim for calcium-rich foods, and the NIH in its Consensus Development Process approved a statement that high calcium intake reduces the risk of osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of calcium on bone density and fractures in postmenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Controlled Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 2001, and examined citations of relevant articles and proceedings of international meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials that randomized postmenopausal women to calcium supplementation or usual calcium intake in the diet and reported bone mineral density of the total body, vertebral spine, hip, or forearm or recorded the number of fractures, and followed patients for at least one year were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three independent reviewers assessed the methodologic quality and extracted data for each trial. For each bone density site (lumbar spine, total body, combined hip and combined forearm), we calculated the weighted mean difference in bone density between treatment and control groups using the percentage change from baseline. We constructed regression models in which the independent variables were year and dose, and the dependent variable was the effect size. This regression was used to determine the years across which pooling was appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed. For each fracture analysis we calculated a risk ratio.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials, representing 1806 participants, were included. Calcium was more effective than placebo in reducing rates of bone loss after two or more years of treatment. The pooled difference in percentage change from baseline was 2.05% (95% CI 0.24 to 3.86) for total body bone density, 1.66% (95% CI 0.92 to 2.39) for the lumbar spine at 2 years, 1.60% (95% CI 0.78 to 2.41) for the hip, and 1.91% (95% CI 0.33 to 3.50) for the distal radius. The relative risk of fractures of the vertebrae was 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.09); the relative risk for non-vertebral fractures was 0.86 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.72).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Calcium supplementation alone has a small positive effect on bone density. The data show a trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures, but it is unclear if calcium reduces the incidence of non vertebral fractures.

Leflunomide for treating rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory joint disease. Leflunomide, as an inhibitor of pyrimidine synthesis, has a different mechanism of action than other existing disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and toxicity of leflunomide compared to placebo or other DMARDs in the treatment of RA.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted a search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for trials up to December 2001. We also hand-searched reference lists and consulted content experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent reviewers selected the trials that met predetermined inclusion criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed methodologic quality using standardized forms.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials were included in this review. Using the ACR20 improvement criteria, there was an absolute difference in improvement of 28% (95% confidence interval: 21 - 35%) favouring leflunomide (232 out of 413 leflunomide treated patients compared to 89 out of 311 placebo patients met the criteria). There was no difference in ACR20 response rate between the patients treated with leflunomide and SSZ or MTX at 6 and 12 months. Other clinical outcomes were improved significantly in the leflunomide group compared to placebo but not different from SSZ or MTX. Withdrawals due to adverse events with leflunomide were 10% greater than placebo (70 out of 416 compared to 18 out of 311 respectively). Important adverse events included gastrointestinal symptoms, elevated liver function tests, alopecia, and infections. Overall adverse events and withdrawals in the leflunomide group were not significantly different from SSZ or MTX.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Leflunomide appears to improve all clinical outcomes and delay radiologic progression at both 6 and 12 months of treatment compared to placebo. Its efficacy and adverse events at 2 years of treatment are comparable to SSZ and MTX. Long-term efficacy and toxicity remains to be established.

Continuous passive motion following total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Knee arthroplasty (KA) is a common intervention that can enhance the quality of life for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Post-surgery rehabilitation protocols often include continuous passive motion (CPM). However, CPM protocols vary considerably amongst institutions.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the current meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of continuous passive motion following total knee arthroplasty.

SEARCH STRATEGY

An electronic search of MEDLINE (1966 to 2002), EMBASE (1988 to 2002), CINAHL (1982 to 2002), HEALTH STAR (1991 to 1994) and CURRENT CONTENTS (1997 to 2002) was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Following an a priori protocol, only randomized controlled trials of CPM for the treatment of participants post KA were eligible. Subjects were 18 years of age or older and had a pre-surgery diagnosis of degenerative joint disease. Both the experimental and control groups received physiotherapy. In addition to the physiotherapy intervention, the experimental group received CPM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion. Data were then extracted and the quality of the trial assessed using predetermined forms. Outcome measures of interest were: active and passive knee range of motion (ROM) length of hospital stay, pain, swelling and quadriceps strength. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed; in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Standardized mean differences (SMD) were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were presented as a relative risk.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials were retained for analysis. Results favouring CPM were found for the main comparison of CPM combined with physiotherapy (PT) versus PT alone at end of treatment. For the primary outcomes of interest, CPM combined with PT was found to statistically significantly increase active knee flexion (WMD 4.30 degrees, 95% CI: 1.96, 6.63) and decrease length of stay (WMD -0.69 days, 95% CI: -1.35, -0.03). CPM was also found to decrease the need for post-operative manipulation (RR 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.53). CPM did not significantly improve passive knee flexion and passive or active knee extension.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

CPM combined with PT, may offer beneficial results compared to PT alone in the short term rehabilitation following total knee arthroplasty.

Intensity of exercise for the treatment of osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic exercise is used as one modality to treat people with osteoarthritis (OA).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of therapeutic exercise of differing intensities on objective and subjective measures of disease activity in people with OA.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Pedro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL up to and including December 2002. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registers. Handsearching was conducted on all retrieved articles for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Comparative controlled studies, such as randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, cohort studies or case/control studies, of therapeutic exercises compared to control or active interventions in people with OA were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were also accepted.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search. These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all data extraction. The two reviewers used a five point scale to assess the quality of the selected articles. Randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals were assessed.

MAIN RESULTS

One study involving 39 participants met the inclusion criteria. The review indicates that there were no significant differences between high intensity and low intensity aerobic exercise on participants with OA of the knee for functional status, gait, pain and aerobic capacity (Mangione 1999).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Both high intensity and low intensity aerobic exercise appear to be equally effective in improving a patient's functional status, gait, pain and aerobic capacity for people with OA of the knee. Further research involving a greater number of subjects, and a larger number of studies involving a control group is needed to further substantiate these results.

Deep transverse friction massage for treating tendinitis

BACKGROUND

Deep transverse friction massage (DTFM) is one of several physiotherapy interventions suggested for the management of pain due to iliotibial band friction syndrome (ITBFS).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of DTFM for treating ITBFS observed in runners.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Medline, Embase, Healthstar, Sports Discus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PEDro, the specialized registry of the Cochrane musculoskeletal group and the Cochrane field of Physical and Related Therapies up to the end of December 2000, using the sensitive search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing therapeutic ultrasound against placebo or another active intervention in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome were selected.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers determined the studies to be included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (LB, VR). Data were independently abstracted by two reviewers (VR, LB), and checked by a third reviewer (BS) using a pre-developed form of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. The same two reviewers, using a validated scale, assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs independently. Iliotibial band friction syndrome outcome measures were extracted from the publications. The pooled analysis was performed using weighted mean differences (WMDs) for pain relief as described as 1) daily pain; 2) pain while running and 3) percentage of maximum pain when running. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout and random effects for outcomes showing heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

One RCT, including 17 patients with ITBFS was included. The experimental group (DTFM combined to rest, stretching exercises, cryotherapy and therapeutic ultrasound) (n=9) was compared to the control group (rest, stretching exercises, cryotherapy and therapeutic ultrasound only) (n=8). This trial showed no statistical difference in the three types of pain relief measured after four consecutive sessions of DTFM combined with other physiotherapy modalities for runners. Despite lack of statistical significance, there was a clinically important relative percentage difference in pain while running of 22%.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

DTFM combined with other physiotherapy modalities did not show consistent benefit over control of pain for runners experiencing ITBFS. These conclusions are limited by the low methodological quality of the one small sample size trial (n=17) included. No conclusions can be drawn about the use or non use of DTFM for the treatment of ITBFS. Future trials, utilizing appropriate methods and adequate sample sizes are needed before conclusions can be drawn regarding the effect of massage on iliotibial band friction syndrome.