Oral or transdermal opioids for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip

Multidisciplinary integrated approach for older adults with symptomatic osteoarthritis: SIMFER and SI-GUIDA Joint Position Statement

Multidisciplinary approach to osteoarthritis (OA) in older patients, whose functional decline is multifactorial and who present with multiple symptoms, has been long advocated, but it is still seldom implemented in daily practice. Therefore, further indications for the management of OA are eagerly awaited and should consider the specific clinical features of this population, including the presence of frailty and comorbidities. This clinical approach should be based both on well-grounded evidence and practical experience of experts in OA management. This manuscript comments the multidisciplinary integrated approach for OA management in the older population, according to the opinion of a multidisciplinary Panel of Experts. This project was developed by a Steering Committee, which consisted of three experts that were identified by the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (Società Italiana di Medicina Fisica e Riabilitativa, SIMFER) and the Italian Society for Unified and Interdisciplinary Management of Musculoskeletal Pain and Algodystrophy (Società Italiana per la Gestione Unificata e Interdisciplinare del Dolore muscolo-scheletrico e dell'Algodistrofia, SI-GUIDA). The Steering Committee identified key evidence on the management of OA in the older through systematic research in MEDLINE and EMBASE, selected the most relevant paper among those identified, and defined some questions concerning current unmet needs in the management of symptomatic OA in the older accordingly. The Panel discussed the identified evidence and questions during two meetings. The discussion was used to generate seven statements with relevance to clinical practice. In conclusion, older adults with symptomatic OA present multiple concomitant issues, including other diseases, marked pain, poly-pharmacy, and often poor psychological and/or socioeconomical status. According to the above-described evidence, it is crucial that the approach to those patients is multidisciplinary and based on the use of dedicated tools. A combination of exercise, mechanical support and properly selected analgesic treatment will greatly help the management of the OA patient, improving at the same time his/her quality of life.

Factors related to the use of opioids as early treatment in patients with knee osteoarthritis

Objective

To examine factors related to the use of opioids as an early treatment option for knee OA patients

Methods

Using the Korean nationwide claim database, we selected knee OA patients between 2013 and 2015. Among them, patients without any claim of knee OA for 2 years before the index date were included as our study population. We analyzed their first claim for prescriptions, including tramadol and stronger opioids, at the index date of each patient. Using a multinomial model, we identified factors associated with the early use of tramadol and stronger opioids in knee OA patients.

Results

Among a total of 2,857,999 knee OA patients, 12.2% (n = 348,516) were treated with opioids as their first treatment. However, the prevalence of stronger opioid use was only 0.07% (n = 1972). Male sex (OR 1.28 in tramadol, OR 1.13 in stronger opioids) and comorbidities with depression (OR 1.05, 1.46), low back pain (OR 1.13, 1.30), intervertebral disc disorder (OR 1.11, 1.40), and spinal stenosis (OR 1.27, 1.55) were the factors for the early use of tramadol or stronger opioids in knee OA patients. Patients in a tertiary referral hospital tended to use tramadol or stronger opioids than those in clinics (OR 1.04, 56.63, respectively).

Conclusion

In Korea, 12.2% of knee OA patients were treated with opioids as an early treatment, and tramadol was used more commonly than stronger opioids. Male sex and having comorbidities such as depression or musculoskeletal disease are patient factors associated with the early use of opioids in knee OA patients.

The association of pain interference and opioid use with healthcare utilization and costs, and wage loss among adults with osteoarthritis in the United States

Aim: To examine associations of opioid use and pain interference with activities (PIA), healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs, and wage loss in noninstitutionalized adults with osteoarthritis in the United States (US). Methods: Adults with osteoarthritis identified from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey for 2011/2013/2015 were stratified by no-opioid use with no/mild PIA, no-opioid use with moderate/severe PIA, opioid use with no/mild PIA, and opioid use with moderate/severe PIA. Outcomes included annualized total HRU, direct healthcare costs, and wage loss. Multivariable regression analyses were used for comparisons versus no-opioid use with no/mild PIA (referent). The counterfactual recycled prediction method estimated incremental costs. Results reflect weighted nationally representative data. Results: Of 4,921 participants (weighted n = 20,785,007), 46.5% had no-opioid use with no/mild PIA; 23.2% had no-opioid use with moderate/severe PIA; 9.6% had opioid use with no/mild PIA; and 20.7% had opioid use with moderate/severe PIA. Moderate/severe PIA and/or opioid use were associated with significantly higher HRU and associated costs, and wage loss. Relative to adults with no/mild PIA, opioid users with moderate/severe PIA were more likely to have hospitalizations, specialist visits, and emergency room visits (all p < .001). Relative to the referent, opioid use with no/mild PIA had higher per-patient incremental annual total healthcare costs ($11,672, 95% confidence interval [CI] = $11,435-$11,909) and wage loss ($1,395, 95% CI = $1,376-$1,414) as did opioid use with moderate/severe PIA ($13,595, 95% CI = $13,319-$13,871; and $2,331, 95% CI = $2,298-$2,363) (all p < .001). Compared with the referent, estimated excess national total healthcare costs/lost wages were $23.3 billion/$1.3 billion for opioid use with no/mild PIA, and $58.5 billion/$2.2 billion for opioid use with moderate/severe PIA. Limitations: Unobservable/unmeasured factors that could not be accounted for. Conclusions: Opioid use with moderate/severe PIA had significantly higher HRU, costs, and wage loss; opioid use was more relevant than PIA to the economic burden. These results suggest unmet needs for alternative pain management strategies.

East meets West: current practices and policies in the management of musculoskeletal aging

Healthy aging is defined as the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables wellbeing in older age. Healthy aging is dependent upon intrinsic capacity, a composite of physical and mental capacities, and the environment an individual inhabits and their interactions with it. Maintenance of musculoskeletal health during aging is a key determinant of functional ability. Sarcopenia, osteoporosis and osteoarthritis, are a triad of musculoskeletal diseases of aging that are major contributors to the global burden of disease and disability worldwide. The prevention and management of these disorders is of increasing importance with pressure mounting from the aging population. In a new initiative, the Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Society of Osteoporosis and Bone Mineral Research, and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases jointly organized a symposium to discuss current practices and policies in the management of musculoskeletal aging. The meeting allowed experts from Europe and China to share their experience and recommendations for the management of these three major diseases. Discussing and analyzing similarities and differences in their practice should lead, through a mutual enrichment of knowledge, to better management of these diseases, in order to preserve intrinsic capacity and retard the age-related degradation of physical ability. In future, it is hoped that sharing of knowledge and best practice will advance global strategies to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal disease and promote healthy aging tailored to meet the individual patient’s needs.

Pain Management Associated with Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Primer

This primer presents a synopsis of pain management strategies associated with total joint arthroplasty. Patients considering total joint arthroplasty often experience moderate to severe pain, which places them at risk of opioid abuse or addiction. Currently, the best practice strategies involve the development of individualized multimodal perioperative approaches to pain management. These practices include prescribing opioids at their lowest dose and for the shortest duration necessary to control symptoms, with close monitoring of common adverse effects. Implementing these practices is essential to battling the ongoing opioid crisis in the US.

The opioid epidemic: helping rheumatologists prevent a crisis

An endemic increase in the number of deaths attributable to prescribed opioids is found in all developed countries. In 2016 in the USA, more than 46 people died each day from overdoses involving prescription opioids. European data show that the number of patients receiving strong opioids is increasing. In addition, there is an upsurge in hospitalisations for opioid intoxication, opioid abuse and deaths in some European countries. This class of analgesic is increasingly used in many rheumatological pathologies. Cohort studies, in various chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) (osteoarthritis, chronic low back pain, rheumatoid arthritis, etc), show that between 2% and 8% of patients are treated with strong opioids. In order to help rheumatologists prescribe strong opioids under optimal conditions and to prevent the risk of death, abuse and misuse, recommendations have recently been published (in France in 2016, the recommendations of the French Society of Study and Treatment of Pain, in 2017, the European recommendations of the European Federation of IASP Chapters and the American Society of International Pain Physicians). They agree on the same general principles: opioids may be of interest in situations of CNCP, but their prescription must follow essential rules. It is necessary to make an accurate assessment of the pain and its origin, to formulate therapeutic objectives (pain, function and/or quality of life), to evaluate beforehand the risk of abuse and to get a specialised opinion beyond a certain dose or duration of prescription.

Safety of Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid Injections in Osteoarthritis: Outcomes of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Some controversy exists regarding the safety of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) in the management of osteoarthritis (OA).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to re-assess the safety profile of IAHA in patients with OA, through a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in the databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Scopus. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials that assessed adverse events (AEs) with IAHA in patients with OA were eligible for inclusion. Authors and/or study sponsors were contacted to obtain the full report of AEs. The primary outcomes were overall severe and serious AEs, as well as the following MedDRA System Organ Class (SOC)-related AEs: gastrointestinal, cardiac, vascular, respiratory, nervous system, skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders, musculoskeletal, renal and urinary disorders, infections and infestations, and hypersensitivity reaction.

RESULTS

Database searches initially identified 1481 records. After exclusions according to the selection criteria, 22 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, and nine studies having adequate data were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. From the studies excluded according to the pre-specified selection criteria, 21 with other pharmacological OA treatments permitted during the trials were a posteriori included in a parallel qualitative synthesis, from which eight studies with adequate data were finally included in a parallel meta-analysis. Since this meta-analysis was designed to assess safety, the exclusion criterion on concomitant anti-OA medication was crucial. However, due to the high number of studies that allowed mainly concomitant oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), we decided to include them in a post hoc parallel analysis in order to compare the results from the two analyses. No statistically significant difference in odds was found between IAHA and placebo for all types of SOC-related disorders, except for infections and infestations, for which significantly lower odds were found with IAHA compared with placebo, both overall (odds ratio [OR] = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-0.93; I² = 0%) and in studies without concomitant anti-OA medication (OR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.89). There were significant increased odds of reporting serious AEs with IAHA compared with placebo, both overall (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.21-2.63; I² = 0%) and in studies with concomitant anti-OA medication (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.10-2.89), but not in studies without concomitant anti-OA medication (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 0.92-3.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the available data on studies without any concomitant anti-OA medication permitted during clinical trials, IAHA seems not to be associated with any safety issue in the management of OA. However, this evidence was associated with only a "low" to "moderate" certainty. A possible association with increased risk of serious AEs, particularly when used with concomitant OA medications, requires further investigation.

Safety of Opioids in Osteoarthritis: Outcomes of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

We aimed to assess the safety of opioids in the management of osteoarthritis (OA) in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid CENTRAL), and Scopus electronic databases. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials that assessed adverse events (AEs) with opioids in patients with OA were eligible for inclusion. Two authors appraised titles, abstracts and full-text papers for suitability and then assessed the studies for random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data and selective outcomes reporting. The primary outcomes of interest were gastrointestinal (GI) disorders, cardiac disorders, vascular disorders, nervous system disorders, skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders, renal and urinary disorders, respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders, as well as overall severe and serious AEs and drug-related AEs. Secondary outcomes were withdrawals due to AEs (i.e. the number of participants who stopped the treatment due to an AE) and total number of AEs (i.e. the number of patients who experienced any AE at least once).

Results

Database searches identified 2189 records, from which, after exclusions, 17 papers were included in the meta-analysis. More disorders of the lower GI tract (constipation, fecaloma) were reported with both immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (ER) formulations of opioids versus placebo: IR opioids (relative risk [RR] 5.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.42–7.89); ER opioids (RR 4.22, 95% CI 3.44–5.17). The risk of upper GI AEs increased fourfold with ER opioids compared with placebo (RR 4.03, 95% CI 0.87–18.62), and the risk of nausea, vomiting or loss of appetite increased four- to fivefold with both formulations: IR opioids (RR 3.39, 95% CI 2.22–5.18); ER opioids (RR 4.03, 95% CI 3.37–4.83). An increased risk of dermatologic AEs (rash and pruritis; IR opioids: RR 3.60, 95% CI 1.74–7.43; ER opioids: RR 7.87, 95% CI 5.20–11.89) and central nervous system disorders (dizziness, headache, fatigue, somnolence, insomnia; IR opioids: RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.90–4.02; ER opioids: RR 2.76, 95% CI 2.19–3.47) was found with all opioid formulations versus placebo.

Conclusions

Our results confirm that there are considerable safety and tolerability issues surrounding the use of opioids in OA, and support the recommendation of international and national guidelines to use opioids in OA after other analgesic options, and for short time periods.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40266-019-00666-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pain Relieving Effect of-NSAIDs-CAIs Hybrid Molecules: Systemic and Intra-Articular Treatments against Rheumatoid Arthritis

To study new target-oriented molecules that are active against rheumatoid arthritis-dependent pain, new dual inhibitors incorporating both a carbonic anhydrase (CA)-binding moiety and a cyclooxygenase inhibitor (NSAID) were tested in a rat model of rheumatoid arthritis induced by CFA intra-articular (i.a.) injection. A comparison between a repeated per os treatment and a single i.a. injection was performed. CFA (50 µL) was injected in the tibiotarsal joint, and the effect of per os repeated treatment (1 mg kg⁻¹) or single i.a injection (1 mg mL⁻¹, 50 µL) with NSAIDs-CAIs hybrid molecules, named 4 and 5, was evaluated. The molecules 4 and 5, which were administered daily for 14 days, significantly prevented CFA-induced hypersensitivity to mechanical noxious (Paw pressure test) and non-noxious stimuli (von Frey test), the postural unbalance related to spontaneous pain (Incapacitance test) and motor alterations (Beam balance test). Moreover, to study a possible localized activity, 4 and 5 were formulated in liposomes (lipo 4 and lipo 5, both 1 mg mL⁻¹) and directly administered by a single i.a. injection seven days after CFA injection. Lipo 5 decreased the mechanical hypersensitivity to noxious and non-noxious stimuli and improved motor coordination. Oral and i.a. treatments did not rescue the joint, as shown by the histological analysis. This new class of potent molecules, which is able to inhibit at the same time CA and cyclooxygenase, shows high activity in a preclinical condition of rheumatoid arthritis, strongly suggesting a novel attractive pharmacodynamic profile.

Supartz (Sodium Hyaluronate) for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Review of Efficacy and Safety

As concerns about the safety of systemic oral pharmacologic treatments for knee osteoarthritis (OA) mount, clinicians have increased the use of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) in managing mild-to-moderate knee OA. Supartz (sodium hyaluronate; Seikagaku Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) is the first IA-HA product to be approved in the world and has the longest history of global use. In this review, we summarize evidence supporting Supartz efficacy and safety, including data from pivotal clinical trials that resulted in approval of Supartz in the United States and Japan, the safety of single and repeated courses of Supartz, and Supartz efficacy using objective outcomes and in special populations. There is strong evidence that single 5-week courses of Supartz provide clinically meaningful reductions in pain and improved function for up to 6 months without risk of serious side effects or complications. Repeated courses of Supartz are as safe as single courses and have an extremely low risk of infection. Findings from promising initial studies, which suggest that Supartz may improve muscle strength, gait pattern, and balance, should be confirmed in randomized controlled trials.

Computerised cognitive training for maintaining cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in late life

BACKGROUND

Increasing age is associated with a natural decline in cognitive function and is also the greatest risk factor for dementia. Cognitive decline and dementia are significant threats to independence and quality of life in older adults. Therefore, identifying interventions that help to maintain cognitive function in older adults or to reduce the risk of dementia is a research priority. Cognitive training uses repeated practice on standardised exercises targeting one or more cognitive domains and is intended to maintain optimum cognitive function. This review examines the effect of computerised cognitive training interventions lasting at least 12 weeks on the cognitive function of healthy adults aged 65 or older.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of computerised cognitive training interventions lasting at least 12 weeks for the maintenance or improvement of cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in late life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched to 31 March 2018 in ALOIS (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois) and performed additional searches of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO Portal/ICTRP (www.apps.who.int/trialsearch) to ensure that the search was as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible, to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, published or unpublished, reported in any language. Participants were cognitively healthy people, and at least 80% of the study population had to be aged 65 or older. Experimental interventions adhered to the following criteria: intervention was any form of interactive computerised cognitive intervention - including computer exercises, computer games, mobile devices, gaming console, and virtual reality - that involved repeated practice on standardised exercises of specified cognitive domain(s) for the purpose of enhancing cognitive function; duration of the intervention was at least 12 weeks; cognitive outcomes were measured; and cognitive training interventions were compared with active or inactive control interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed preliminary screening of search results using a 'crowdsourcing' method to identify RCTs. At least two review authors working independently screened the remaining citations against inclusion criteria. At least two review authors also independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included RCTs. Where appropriate, we synthesised data in random-effect meta-analyses, comparing computerised cognitive training (CCT) separately with active and inactive controls. We expressed treatment effects as standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used GRADE methods to describe the overall quality of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight RCTs with a total of 1183 participants. Researchers provided interventions over 12 to 26 weeks; in five trials, the duration of intervention was 12 or 13 weeks. The included studies had a moderate risk of bias. Review authors noted a lot of inconsistency between trial results. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes.We compared CCT first against active control interventions, such as watching educational videos. Because of the very low quality of the evidence, we were unable to determine any effect of CCT on our primary outcome of global cognitive function or on secondary outcomes of episodic memory, speed of processing, executive function, and working memory.We also compared CCT versus inactive control (no interventions). Negative SMDs favour CCT over control. We found no studies on our primary outcome of global cognitive function. In terms of our secondary outcomes, trial results suggest slight improvement in episodic memory (mean difference (MD) -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.73 to -0.07; 150 participants; 1 study; low-quality evidence) and no effect on executive function (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.15; 292 participants; 2 studies; low-quality evidence), working memory (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.27; 60 participants; 1 study; low-quality evidence), or verbal fluency (MD -0.11, 95% CI -1.58 to 1.36; 150 participants; 1 study; low-quality evidence). We could not determine any effects on speed of processing at trial endpoints because the evidence was of very low quality.We found no evidence on quality of life, activities of daily living, or adverse effects in either comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found little evidence from the included studies to suggest that 12 or more weeks of CCT improves cognition in healthy older adults. However, our limited confidence in the results reflects the overall quality of the evidence. Inconsistency between trials was a major limitation. In five of the eight trials, the duration of intervention was just three months. The possibility that longer periods of training could be beneficial remains to be more fully explored.

Computerised cognitive training for maintaining cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in midlife

BACKGROUND

Normal aging is associated with changes in cognitive function that are non-pathological and are not necessarily indicative of future neurocognitive disease. Low cognitive and brain reserve and limited cognitive stimulation are associated with increased risk of dementia. Emerging evidence now suggests that subtle cognitive changes, detectable years before criteria for mild cognitive impairment are met, may be predictive of future dementia. Important for intervention and reduction in disease risk, research also suggests that engaging in stimulating mental activity throughout adulthood builds cognitive and brain reserve and reduces dementia risk. Therefore, midlife (defined here as 40 to 65 years) may be a suitable time to introduce cognitive interventions for maintaining cognitive function and, in the longer term, possibly preventing or delaying the onset of clinical dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of computerised cognitive training interventions lasting at least 12 weeks for maintaining or improving cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in midlife.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched up to 31 March 2018 in ALOIS (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois), the specialised register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG). We ran additional searches in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO Portal/ICTRP at www.apps.who.int/trialsearch, to ensure that the search was as comprehensive and as up-to-date as possible, to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs, published or unpublished, reported in any language. Participants were cognitively healthy people between 40 and 65 years of age (80% of study population within this age range). Experimental interventions adhered to the following criteria: intervention was any form of interactive computerised cognitive intervention - including computer exercises, computer games, mobile devices, gaming console, and virtual reality - that involved repeated practice on standardised exercises of specified cognitive domain(s) for the purpose of enhancing cognitive function; duration of the intervention was at least 12 weeks; cognitive outcomes were measured; and cognitive training interventions were compared with active or inactive control interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For preliminary screening of search results, we used a 'crowd' method to identify RCTs. At least two review authors working independently screened remaining citations against inclusion criteria; independently extracted data; and assessed the quality of the included trial, using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. We used GRADE to describe the overall quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one eligible study that examined the effect of computerised cognitive training (CCT) in 6742 participants over 50 years of age, with training and follow-up duration of six months. We considered the study to be at high risk of attrition bias and the overall quality of the evidence to be low.Researchers provided no data on our primary outcome. Results indicate that there may be a small advantage for the CCT group for executive function (mean difference (MD) -1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.85 to -1.29; participants = 3994; low-quality evidence) and a very small advantage for the control group for working memory (MD 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.15; participants = 5831; low-quality evidence). The intervention may have had little or no effect on episodic memory (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.04; participants = 3090; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low-quality evidence from only one study. We are unable to determine whether computerised cognitive training is effective in maintaining global cognitive function among healthy adults in midlife. We strongly recommend that high-quality studies be undertaken to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of cognitive training in midlife, using interventions that last long enough that they may have enduring effects on cognitive and brain reserve, and with investigators following up long enough to assess effects on clinically important outcomes in later life.

Computerised cognitive training for preventing dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment

BACKGROUND

The number of people living with dementia is increasing rapidly. Clinical dementia does not develop suddenly, but rather is preceded by a period of cognitive decline beyond normal age-related change. People at this intermediate stage between normal cognitive function and clinical dementia are often described as having mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Considerable research and clinical efforts have been directed toward finding disease-modifying interventions that may prevent or delay progression from MCI to clinical dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of at least 12 weeks of computerised cognitive training (CCT) on maintaining or improving cognitive function and preventing dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched to 31 May 2018 in ALOIS (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois) and ran additional searches in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO portal/ICTRP (www.apps.who.int/trialsearch) to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which cognitive training via interactive computerised technology was compared with an active or inactive control intervention. Experimental computerised cognitive training (CCT) interventions had to adhere to the following criteria: minimum intervention duration of 12 weeks; any form of interactive computerised cognitive training, including computer exercises, computer games, mobile devices, gaming console, and virtual reality. Participants were adults with a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild neurocognitive disorder (MND), or otherwise at high risk of cognitive decline.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the included RCTs. We expressed treatment effects as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes and as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We used the GRADE approach to describe the overall quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight RCTs with a total of 660 participants met review inclusion criteria. Duration of the included trials varied from 12 weeks to 18 months. Only one trial used an inactive control. Most studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in several domains. Overall, our ability to draw conclusions was hampered by very low-quality evidence. Almost all results were very imprecise; there were also problems related to risk of bias, inconsistency between trials, and indirectness of the evidence.No trial provided data on incident dementia. For comparisons of CCT with both active and inactive controls, the quality of evidence on our other primary outcome of global cognitive function immediately after the intervention period was very low. Therefore, we were unable to draw any conclusions about this outcome.Due to very low quality of evidence, we were also unable to determine whether there was any effect of CCT compared to active control on our secondary outcomes of episodic memory, working memory, executive function, depression, functional performance, and mortality. We found low-quality evidence suggesting that there is probably no effect on speed of processing (SMD 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to 0.56; 2 studies; 119 participants), verbal fluency (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.76 to 0.44; 3 studies; 150 participants), or quality of life (mean difference (MD) 0.40, 95% CI -1.85 to 2.65; 1 study; 19 participants).When CCT was compared with inactive control, we obtained data on five secondary outcomes, including episodic memory, executive function, verbal fluency, depression, and functional performance. We found very low-quality evidence; therefore, we were unable to draw any conclusions about these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently available evidence does not allow us to determine whether or not computerised cognitive training will prevent clinical dementia or improve or maintain cognitive function in those who already have evidence of cognitive impairment. Small numbers of trials, small samples, risk of bias, inconsistency between trials, and highly imprecise results mean that it is not possible to derive any implications for clinical practice, despite some observed large effect sizes from individual studies. Direct adverse events are unlikely to occur, although the time and sometimes the money involved in computerised cognitive training programmes may represent significant burdens. Further research is necessary and should concentrate on improving methodological rigour, selecting suitable outcomes measures, and assessing generalisability and persistence of any effects. Trials with long-term follow-up are needed to determine the potential of this intervention to reduce the risk of dementia.

Long-term pain relief in canine osteoarthritis by a single intra-articular injection of resiniferatoxin, a potent TRPV1 agonist

The translational potential of analgesic approaches emerging from basic research can be augmented by client-owned dog trials. We report on a peripheral interventional approach that uses intra-articular injection of the ultrapotent TRPV1 agonist resiniferatoxin (RTX) to produce a selective long-term chemoinactivation of nociceptive primary afferent nerve endings for pain control in naturally occurring canine osteoarthritis. A single injection of 10 µg of RTX, produced suppression of pain, improvement in gait, weight bearing, and improvement in the dog's activities of daily living lasting 4 months or longer. Two to 3 years after the injection, there are no alterations to suggest that removal of inflammatory pain caused accelerated joint degeneration (Charcot joint) in any of the dogs. To amplify the effective use of canine subjects in translational analgesia research, we report a high-quality canine dorsal root ganglion transcriptome. Some targets for analgesia are highly conserved both in protein sequence and level of expression within a target tissue while others diverge substantially from the human. This knowledge is especially important for development of analgesics aimed at peripheral molecular targets and provides a template for informed translational research. The peripheral site of action, long duration of analgesia, apparent safety, and retention of coordination, all resulting from a single dose suggest that intra-articular RTX may be an effective intervention for osteoarthritis pain with few or no side effects and lead to an improved quality of life.

Vitamin and mineral supplementation for maintaining cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in mid and late life

BACKGROUND

Vitamins and minerals play multiple functions within the central nervous system which may help to maintain brain health and optimal cognitive functioning. Supplementation of the diet with various vitamins and minerals has been suggested as a means of maintaining cognitive function, or even of preventing dementia, in later life.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of vitamin and mineral supplementation on cognitive function in cognitively healthy people aged 40 years or more.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's (CDCIG) specialised register, as well as MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO Portal/ICTRP from inception to 26th January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that evaluated the cognitive effects on people aged 40 years or more of any vitamin or mineral supplements taken by mouth for at least three months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessments were done in duplicate. Vitamins were considered broadly in the categories of B vitamins, antioxidant vitamins, and combinations of both. Minerals were considered separately, where possible. If interventions and outcomes were considered sufficiently similar, then data were pooled. In order to separate short-term cognitive effects from possible longer-term effects on the trajectory of cognitive decline, data were pooled for various treatment durations from 3 months to 12 months and up to 10 years or more.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, we included 28 studies with more than 83,000 participants. There were some general limitations of the evidence. Most participants were enrolled in studies which were not designed primarily to assess cognition. These studies often had no baseline cognitive assessment and used only brief cognitive assessments at follow-up. Very few studies assessed the incidence of dementia. Most study reports did not mention adverse events or made only very general statements about them. Only 10 studies had a mean follow-up > 5 years. Only two studies had participants whose mean age was < 60 years at baseline. The risk of bias in the included studies was generally low, other than a risk of attrition bias for longer-term outcomes. We considered the certainty of the evidence behind almost all results to be moderate or low.We included 14 studies with 27,882 participants which compared folic acid, vitamin B12, vitamin B6, or a combination of these to placebo. The majority of participants were aged over 60 years and had a history of cardio- or cerebrovascular disease. We found that giving B vitamin supplements to cognitively healthy adults, mainly in their 60s and 70s, probably has little or no effect on global cognitive function at any time point up to 5 years (SMD values from -0.03 to 0.06) and may also have no effect at 5-10 years (SMD -0.01). There were very sparse data on adverse effects or on incidence of cognitive impairment or dementia.We included 8 studies with 47,840 participants in which the active intervention was one or more of the antioxidant vitamins: ß-carotene, vitamin C or vitamin E. Results were mixed. For overall cognitive function, there was low-certainty evidence of benefit associated with ß-carotene after a mean of 18 years of treatment (MD 0.18 TICS points, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.35) and of vitamin C after 5 years to 10 years (MD 0.46 TICS points, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.78), but not at earlier time points. From two studies which reported on dementia incidence, there was low-certainty evidence of no effect of an antioxidant vitamin combination or of vitamin E, either alone or combined with selenium. One of the included studies had been designed to look for effects on the incidence of prostate cancer; it found a statistically significant increase in prostate cancer diagnoses among men taking vitamin E.One trial with 4143 participants compared vitamin D3 (400 IU/day) and calcium supplements to placebo. We found low- to moderate-certainty evidence of no effect of vitamin D3 and calcium supplements at any time-point up to 10 years on overall cognitive function (MD after a mean of 7.8 years -0.1 MMSE points, 95% CI -0.81 to 0.61) or the incidence of dementia (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24). A pilot study with 60 participants used a higher dose of vitamin D3 (4000 IU on alternate days) and found preliminary evidence that this dose probably has no effect on cognitive function over six months.We included data from one trial of zinc and copper supplementation with 1072 participants. There was moderate-certainty evidence of little or no effect on overall cognitive function (MD 0.6 MMSE points, 95% CI -0.19 to 1.39) or on the incidence of cognitive impairment after 5 years to 10 years. A second smaller trial provided no usable data, but reported no cognitive effects of six months of supplementation with zinc gluconate.From one study with 3711 participants, there was low-certainty evidence of no effect of approximately five years of selenium supplementation on the incidence of dementia (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.13).Finally, we included three trials of complex supplements (combinations of B vitamins, antioxidant vitamins, and minerals) with 6306 participants. From the one trial which assessed overall cognitive function, there was low-certainty evidence of little or no effect on the TICS (MD after a mean of 8.5 years 0.12, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.38).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find evidence that any vitamin or mineral supplementation strategy for cognitively healthy adults in mid or late life has a meaningful effect on cognitive decline or dementia, although the evidence does not permit definitive conclusions. There were very few data on supplementation starting in midlife (< 60 years); studies designed to assess cognitive outcomes tended to be too short to assess maintenance of cognitive function; longer studies often had other primary outcomes and used cognitive measures which may have lacked sensitivity. The only positive signals of effect came from studies of long-term supplementation with antioxidant vitamins. These may be the most promising for further research.

Pharmacological treatment of knee osteoarthritis: Special considerations of the new German guideline

The pharmacological treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a purely symptomatic therapy, which often ensures that the mobility of the patient is successfully retained. This article refers to the recommendations and opinions regarding the pharmacotherapy of knee OA contained in the new guideline of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), highlighting several important aspects and describing the considerations underlying the decision-making process. With this article it is hoped that therapeutic effectiveness can be realistically estimated, that any risks of medication errors and avoidable side effects can be reduced, and that further helpful measures can be taken into consideration.

Hip Osteoarthritis: A Primer

The objective of this article is to deliver a concise up-to-date review on hip osteoarthritis. We describe the epidemiology (disease distribution), etiologies (associated risk factors), symptoms, diagnosis and classification, and treatment options for hip osteoarthritis. A quiz serves to assist readers in their understanding of the presented material.

Vitamin and mineral supplementation for preventing dementia or delaying cognitive decline in people with mild cognitive impairment

BACKGROUND

Vitamins and minerals have many functions in the nervous system which are important for brain health. It has been suggested that various different vitamin and mineral supplements might be useful in maintaining cognitive function and delaying the onset of dementia. In this review, we sought to examine the evidence for this in people who already had mild cognitive impairment (MCI).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of vitamin and mineral supplementation on cognitive function and the incidence of dementia in people with mild cognitive impairment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's (CDCIG) specialised register, as well as MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACs, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO Portal/ICTRP, from inception to 25 January 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised, placebo-controlled trials which evaluated orally administered vitamin or mineral supplements in participants with a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and which assessed the incidence of dementia or cognitive outcomes, or both. We were interested in studies applicable to the general population of older people and therefore excluded studies in which participants had severe vitamin or mineral deficiencies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We sought data on our primary outcomes of dementia incidence and overall cognitive function and on secondary outcomes of episodic memory, executive function, speed of processing, quality of life, functional performance, clinical global impression, adverse events, and mortality. We conducted data collection and analysis according to standard Cochrane systematic review methods. We assessed the risk of bias of included studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' assessment tool. We grouped vitamins and minerals according to their putative mechanism of action and, where we considered it to be clinically appropriate, we pooled data using random-effects methods. We used GRADE methods to assess the overall quality of evidence for each comparison and outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials with 879 participants which investigated B vitamin supplements. In four trials, the intervention was a combination of vitamins B6, B12, and folic acid; in one, it was folic acid only. Doses varied. We considered there to be some risks of performance and attrition bias and of selective outcome reporting among these trials. Our primary efficacy outcomes were the incidence of dementia and scores on measures of overall cognitive function. None of the trials reported the incidence of dementia and the evidence on overall cognitive function was of very low-quality. There was probably little or no effect of B vitamins taken for six to 24 months on episodic memory, executive function, speed of processing, or quality of life. The evidence on our other secondary clinical outcomes, including harms, was very sparse or very low-quality. There was evidence from one study that there may be a slower rate of brain atrophy over two years in participants taking B vitamins. The same study reported subgroup analyses based on the level of serum homocysteine (tHcy) at baseline and found evidence that B vitamins may improve episodic memory in those with tHcy above the median at baseline.We included one trial (n = 516) of vitamin E supplementation. Vitamin E was given as 1000 IU of alpha-tocopherol twice daily. We considered this trial to be at risk of attrition and selective reporting bias. There was probably no effect of vitamin E on the probability of progression from MCI to Alzheimer's dementia over three years (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.41; n = 516; 1 study, moderate-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of an effect at intermediate time points. The available data did not allow us to conduct analyses, but the authors reported no significant effect of three years of supplementation with vitamin E on overall cognitive function, episodic memory, speed of processing, clinical global impression, functional performance, adverse events, or mortality (five deaths in each group). We considered this to be low-quality evidence.We included one trial (n = 256) of combined vitamin E and vitamin C supplementation and one trial (n = 26) of supplementation with chromium picolinate. In both cases, there was a single eligible cognitive outcome, but we considered the evidence to be very low-quality and so could not be sure of any effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on vitamin and mineral supplements as treatments for MCI is very limited. Three years of treatment with high-dose vitamin E probably does not reduce the risk of progression to dementia, but we have no data on this outcome for other supplements. Only B vitamins have been assessed in more than one RCT. There is no evidence for beneficial effects on cognition of supplementation with B vitamins for six to 24 months. Evidence from a single study of a reduced rate of brain atrophy in participants taking vitamin B and a beneficial effect of vitamin B on episodic memory in those with higher tHcy at baseline warrants attempted replication.

Comparative efficacy and safety of oral or transdermal opioids in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis is a common degenerative joint disease that eventually leads to disability and poor quality of life. The main symptoms are joint pain and mobility disorders. If the patient has severe pain or other analgesics are contraindicated, opioids may be a viable treatment option. To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of opioids in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis, we will integrate direct and indirect evidence using a Bayesian network meta-analysis to establish hierarchies of these drugs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and PsycINFO databases as well as published and unpublished research in international registries and regulatory agency websites for osteoarthritis reports published prior to 5 January 2018. There will be no restrictions on the language. Randomised clinical trials that compare oral or transdermal opioids with other various opioids, placebo or no treatment for patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis will be included. The primary outcomes of efficacy will be pain and function. We will use pain and function scales to evaluate the main outcomes. The secondary outcomes of safety will be defined as the proportion of patients who have stopped treatment due to side effects. Pairwise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses will be performed for all related outcome measures. We will conduct subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our findings. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework will be used to assess the quality of the evidence contributing to each network assessment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study does not require formal ethical approval because individual patient data will not be included. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications or conference presentations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018085503.

Effects of Mantra Meditation versus Music Listening on Knee Pain, Function, and Related Outcomes in Older Adults with Knee Osteoarthritis: An Exploratory Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT)

OBJECTIVE

Disease-modifying treatments for OA remain elusive, and commonly used medications can have serious side effects. Although meditation and music listening (ML) have been shown to improve outcomes in certain chronic pain populations, research in OA is sparse. In this pilot RCT, we explore the effects of two mind-body practices, mantra meditation (MM) and ML, on knee pain, function, and related outcomes in adults with knee OA.

METHODS

Twenty-two older ambulatory adults diagnosed with knee OA were randomized to a MM (N=11) or ML program (N=11) and asked to practice 15-20 minutes, twice daily for 8 weeks. Core outcomes included knee pain (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] and Numeric Rating Scale), knee function (KOOS), and perceived OA severity (Patient Global Assessment). Additional outcomes included perceived stress (Perceived Stress Scale), mood (Profile of Mood States), sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), and health-related quality of life (QOL, SF-36). Participants were assessed at baseline and following completion of the program.

RESULTS

Twenty participants (91%) completed the study (9 MM, 11 ML). Compliance was excellent; participants completed an average of 12.1±0.83 sessions/week. Relative to baseline, participants in both groups demonstrated improvement post-intervention in all core outcomes, including knee pain, function, and perceived OA severity, as well as improvement in mood, perceived stress, and QOL (Physical Health) (p's≤0.05). Relative to ML, the MM group showed greater improvements in overall mood and sleep (p's≤0.04), QOL-Mental Health (p<0.07), kinesiophobia (p=0.09), and two domains of the KOOS (p's<0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this exploratory RCT suggest that a simple MM and, possibly, ML program may be effective in reducing knee pain and dysfunction, decreasing stress, and improving mood, sleep, and QOL in adults with knee OA.

2017 update of the Turkish League Against Rheumatism (TLAR) evidence-based recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis

In a Turkish League Against Rheumatism (TLAR) project, evidence-based recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) was developed for the first time in our country in 2012 (TLAR-2012). In accordance with developing medical knowledge and scientific evidence, recommendations were updated. The committee was composed of 22 physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists (4 have rheumatology subspeciality also) and an orthopaedic surgeon. Systematic literature search were applied on Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane and Turkish Medical Index for the dates between January the 1st 2012 and January the 29th of 2015. The articles were assessed for quality and classified according to hierarchy for the level of evidence, and the selected ones sent to committee members electronically. They were asked to develop new recommendations. In the meeting in 2015, the format of the recommendations was decided to be patient-based and considering the grade and the severity of the disease. By the discussion of the each item under the light of new evidences, the final recommendations were developed. Each item was voted electronically on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) and the strength of recommendation (SoR) was calculated. In the light of evidences, totally 11 titles of recommendations were developed; the first 7 were applicable to each patient in every stages of the disease, remaining were for defined specific clinical situations. The mean SoR value of the recommendations was between 7.44 and 9.93. TLAR-2012 recommendations were updated in a new format. We think that, present recommendations will be beneficial for the physicians who manage, as well as the patients who suffer from the disease.

[Pharmacological treatment of osteoarthritis-related pain]

Joint pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) is often severe and disabling and affects a large proportion of the aging population impairing daily living and quality of life. Numerous pharmacological treatment approaches are available. Including major OA guidelines this review presents the current evidence of pharmacological therapies in OA-related pain and covers topical, oral and intraarticular treatment approaches. In patients with mild OA topical nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can be recommended. Topical capsaicin can be used when other treatments are ineffective or contraindicated. In patients with moderate to severe OA oral NSAIDs are suggested at the lowest effective dose for the shortest possible duration to control symptoms. Importantly, drug-related side effects and gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and renal comorbidities need to be taken into account. In patients with multiple-joint OA and high risk of NSAID-induced adverse events duloxetine can be considered. The evidence of metamizole, symptomatic slow-acting drugs in osteoarthritis and other nutritional supplements in the treatment of OA pain is uncertain and the use of opioids is not routinely recommended. In patients suffering from severe OA-related pain intraarticular injections with glucocorticoids can be suggested to achieve short-term pain relief. Evidence for interventional approaches using hyaluronic acid or platelet-rich plasma is uncertain. Yet, the efficacy of pharmacological therapies in OA-related pain is often inconsistent and severe adverse events might occur. Thus, critical use of the different treatment options considering patient-related comorbidities and nonpharmacological therapies is of major importance.

Trends and risk factors for prolonged opioid use after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in opioid use after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), to identify predictors of prolonged use and to compare the rates of opioid use after UKA, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Materials and Methods

We identified 4205 patients who had undergone UKA between 2007 and 2015 from the Humana Inc. administrative claims database. Post-operative opioid use for one year post-operatively was assessed using the rates of monthly repeat prescription. These were then compared between patients with and without a specific variable of interest and with those of patients who had undergone TKA and THA.

Results

A total of 4205 UKA patients were analysed. Of these, 1362 patients (32.4%) were users of opioids. Pre-operative opioid use was the strongest predictor of prolonged opioid use after UKA. Opioid users were 1.4 (81.6% versus 57.7%), 3.7 (49.5% versus 13.3%) and 5.5 (35.8% versus 6.5%) times more likely to be taking opioids at one, two and three months post-operatively, respectively (p < 0.05 for all). Younger age and specific comorbidities such as anxiety/depression, smoking, back pain and substance abuse were found to significantly increase the rate of repeat prescription for opioids after UKA. Overall, UKA patients required significantly less opioid prescriptions than patients who had undergone THA and TKA.

Conclusion

One-third of patients who undergo UKA are given opioids in the three months pre-operatively. Pre-operative opioid use is the best predictor of increased repeat prescriptions after UKA. However, other intrinsic patient characteristics are also predictive.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B(1 Supple A):62–7.

High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is typically described as pain on most days for at least three months. Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is any chronic pain that is not due to a malignancy. Chronic non-cancer pain in adults is a common and complex clinical issue where opioids are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that the use of high doses of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain lacks evidence of effectiveness and may increase the risk of adverse events.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the evidence from Cochrane Reviews and Overviews regarding the efficacy and safety of high-dose opioids (here defined as 200 mg morphine equivalent or more per day) for chronic non-cancer pain.

METHODS

We identified Cochrane Reviews and Overviews through a search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (The Cochrane Library). The date of the last search was 18 April 2017. Two review authors independently assessed the search results. We planned to analyse data on any opioid agent used at high dose for two weeks or more for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain in adults.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any reviews or overviews meeting the inclusion criteria. The excluded reviews largely reflected low doses or titrated doses where all doses were analysed as a single group; no data for high dose only could be extracted.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical lack of high-quality evidence regarding how well high-dose opioids work for the management of chronic non-cancer pain in adults, and regarding the presence and severity of adverse events. No evidence-based argument can be made on the use of high-dose opioids, i.e. 200 mg morphine equivalent or more daily, in clinical practice. Trials typically used doses below our cut-off; we need to know the efficacy and harm of higher doses, which are often used in clinical practice.

Adverse events associated with medium- and long-term use of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is common and can be challenging to manage. Despite increased utilisation of opioids, the safety and efficacy of long-term use of these compounds for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) remains controversial. This overview of Cochrane Reviews complements the overview entitled 'High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews'.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the occurrence and nature of adverse events associated with any opioid agent (any dose, frequency, or route of administration) used on a medium- or long-term basis for the treatment of CNCP in adults.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (the Cochrane Library) Issue 3, 2017 on 8 March 2017 to identify all Cochrane Reviews of studies of medium- or long-term opioid use (2 weeks or more) for CNCP in adults aged 18 and over. We assessed the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR criteria (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) as adapted for Cochrane Overviews. We assessed the quality of the evidence for the outcomes using the GRADE framework.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 16 reviews in our overview, of which 14 presented unique quantitative data. These 14 Cochrane Reviews investigated 14 different opioid agents that were administered for time periods of two weeks or longer. The longest study was 13 months in duration, with most in the 6- to 16-week range. The quality of the included reviews was high using AMSTAR criteria, with 11 reviews meeting all 10 criteria, and 5 of the reviews meeting 9 out of 10, not scoring a point for either duplicate study selection and data extraction, or searching for articles irrespective of language and publication type. The quality of the evidence for the generic adverse event outcomes according to GRADE ranged from very low to moderate, with risk of bias and imprecision being identified for the following generic adverse event outcomes: any adverse event, any serious adverse event, and withdrawals due to adverse events. A GRADE assessment of the quality of the evidence for specific adverse events led to a downgrading to very low- to moderate-quality evidence due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision.We calculated the equivalent milligrams of morphine per 24 hours for each opioid studied (buprenorphine, codeine, dextropropoxyphene, dihydrocodeine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, levorphanol, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, tapentadol, tilidine, and tramadol). In the 14 Cochrane Reviews providing unique quantitative data, there were 61 studies with a total of 18,679 randomised participants; 12 of these studies had a cross-over design with two to four arms and a total of 796 participants. Based on the 14 selected Cochrane Reviews, there was a significantly increased risk of experiencing any adverse event with opioids compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 1.66) as well as with opioids compared to a non-opioid active pharmacological comparator, with a similar risk ratio (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.33). There was also a significantly increased risk of experiencing a serious adverse event with opioids compared to placebo (RR 2.75, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.67). Furthermore, we found significantly increased risk ratios with opioids compared to placebo for a number of specific adverse events: constipation, dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, hot flushes, increased sweating, nausea, pruritus, and vomiting.There was no data on any of the following prespecified adverse events of interest in any of the included reviews in this overview of Cochrane Reviews: addiction, cognitive dysfunction, depressive symptoms or mood disturbances, hypogonadism or other endocrine dysfunction, respiratory depression, sexual dysfunction, and sleep apnoea or sleep-disordered breathing. We found no data for adverse events analysed by sex or ethnicity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A number of adverse events, including serious adverse events, are associated with the medium- and long-term use of opioids for CNCP. The absolute event rate for any adverse event with opioids in trials using a placebo as comparison was 78%, with an absolute event rate of 7.5% for any serious adverse event. Based on the adverse events identified, clinically relevant benefit would need to be clearly demonstrated before long-term use could be considered in people with CNCP in clinical practice. A number of adverse events that we would have expected to occur with opioid use were not reported in the included Cochrane Reviews. Going forward, we recommend more rigorous identification and reporting of all adverse events in randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews on opioid therapy. The absence of data for many adverse events represents a serious limitation of the evidence on opioids. We also recommend extending study follow-up, as a latency of onset may exist for some adverse events.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of duloxetine added to usual care for patients with chronic pain due to hip or knee osteoarthritis: protocol of a pragmatic open-label cluster randomised trial (the DUO trial)

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent painful condition of the musculoskeletal system. The effectiveness of current analgesic options has proven to be limited and improved analgesic treatment is needed. Several randomised placebo-controlled trials have now demonstrated the efficacy of duloxetine, an antidepressant with a centrally acting effect, in the treatment of OA pain. The aim of the current study is to investigate if duloxetine is effective and cost-effective as a third-choice analgesic added to usual care for treating chronic pain compared with usual care alone in general practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A pragmatic open, cluster randomised trial is conducted. Patients with pain due to hip or knee OA on most days of the past 3 months with insufficient benefit of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or contraindications or intolerable side effects are included. General practices are randomised to either (1) duloxetine and usual care or (2) usual care only. Primary outcome is pain at 3 months measured on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale. Secondary outcomes at 3 months and 1 year are pain (WOMAC, at 1 year), function (WOMAC), adverse reactions, quality of life and modification of the response to treatment by the presence of centrally sensitised pain (modified PainDETECT). At 1 year, medical and productivity costs will be assessed. Analyses will be performed following the intention-to-treat principle taking the cluster design into account.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the local Medical Ethics Committee (2015-293). Results will be published in a scientific peer-reviewed journal and will be communicated at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Dutch Trial Registry(ntr4798); Pre-results.

Patterns and predictors of persistent opioid use following hip or knee arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

The relationship between arthroplasty and long-term opioid use in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis is not well studied. We examined the prevalence, patterns and predictors of persistent opioid use after hip or knee arthroplasty.

METHOD

Using claims data (2004-2013) from a US commercial health plan, we identified adults who underwent hip or knee arthroplasty and filled ≥1 opioid prescription within 30 days after the surgery. We defined persistent opioid users as patients who filled ≥1 opioid prescription every month during the 1-year postoperative period based on group-based trajectory models. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine preoperative predictors of persistent opioid use after surgery.

RESULTS

We identified 57,545 patients who underwent hip or knee arthroplasty. The mean ± SD age was 61.5 ± 7.8 years and 87.1% had any opioid use preoperatively. Overall, 7.6% persistently used opioids after the surgery. Among patients who used opioids in 80% of the time for ≥4 months preoperatively (n = 3023), 72.1% became persistent users. In multivariable analysis, knee arthroplasty vs hip, a longer hospitalization stay, discharge to a rehabilitation facility, preoperative opioid use (e.g., a longer duration and greater dosage and frequency), a higher comorbidity score, back pain, rheumatoid arthritis, fibromyalgia, migraine and smoking, and benzodiazepine use at baseline were strong predictors for persistent opioid use (C-statistic = 0.917).

CONCLUSION

Over 7% of patients persistently used opioids in the year after hip or knee arthroplasty. Given the adverse health effects of persistent opioid use, strategies need to be developed to prevent persistent opioid use after this common surgery.

The effects of resistance training on muscle strength, joint pain, and hand function in individuals with hand osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hand osteoarthritis is a common condition characterised by joint pain and muscle weakness. These factors are thought to contribute to ongoing disability. Some evidence exists that resistance training decreases pain, improves muscle strength, and enhances function in people with knee and hip osteoarthritis. However, there is currently a lack of consensus regarding its effectiveness in people with hand osteoarthritis. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish whether resistance training in people with hand osteoarthritis increases grip strength, decreases joint pain, and improves hand function.

Methods

Seven databases were searched from 1975 until July 1, 2016. Randomised controlled trials were included. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess studies’ methodological quality. The Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was adopted to rate overall quality of evidence. Suitable studies were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.

Results

Five studies were included with a total of 350 participants. The majority of the training programs did not meet recommended intensity, frequency, or progression criteria for muscle strengthening. There was moderate-quality evidence that resistance training does not improve grip strength (mean difference = 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) = –0.84, 3.54; I² = 50%; p = 0.23 ). Low-quality evidence showed significant improvements in joint pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) = –0.23; 95% CI = –0.42, –0.04; I² = 0%; p = 0.02) which were not clinically relevant. Low-quality evidence demonstrated no improvements in hand function following resistance training (SMD = –0.1; 95% CI = –0.33, 0.13; I² = 28%; p = 0.39).

Conclusion

There is no evidence that resistance training has a significant effect on grip strength or hand function in people with hand osteoarthritis. Low-quality evidence suggests it has a small, clinically unimportant pain-relieving effect. Future studies should investigate resistance training regimes with adequate intensity, frequency, and progressions to achieve gains in muscle strength.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-017-1348-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Chemogenetic Inhibition of Pain Neurons in a Mouse Model of Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the ability of drugs that activate inhibitory G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) expressed in peripheral voltage-gated sodium channel 1.8 (Na_V 1.8)-positive sensory neurons to control osteoarthritis (OA)-associated pain.

METHODS

We used designer receptors exclusively activated by a designer drug (DREADD) technology, which employs engineered GPCRs to activate or inhibit neurons upon binding the synthetic ligand clozapine N-oxide (CNO). Na_V 1.8-Pdi C57BL/6 mice were generated to express the inhibitory DREADD receptor Pdi in Na_V 1.8-expressing sensory neurons. Destabilization of the medial meniscus (DMM) surgery was performed in 10-week-old male mice. Four, 8, 12, or 16 weeks after surgery, knee hyperalgesia or hind paw mechanical allodynia was tested. Subsequently, CNO or vehicle was administered, and the effect on pain-related behaviors was measured by a blinded observer. Morphine was used as a control.

RESULTS

Immunohistochemistry and electrophysiology confirmed functional expression of the inhibitory DREADD receptor Pdi by Na_V 1.8-positive sensory neurons. Acute inhibition of Na_V 1.8-expressing neurons in mice treated with CNO reduced knee hyperalgesia 4 weeks after DMM surgery and reduced mechanical allodynia 8 weeks after DMM surgery. Inhibition had no effect on pain-related behaviors 12 and 16 weeks after DMM surgery. Morphine, a drug that activates GPCRs in the peripheral and central nervous systems, was still effective in the later stage of experimental OA.

CONCLUSION

Chemogenetic inhibition of Na_V 1.8-expressing neurons blocks knee hyperalgesia and mechanical allodynia in early experimental OA, but is no longer efficacious in the later stages. These data indicate that activation of inhibitory GPCRs located solely outside the central nervous system may be ineffective in treating chronic OA pain.

Nonoperative Options for Management of Articular Cartilage Disease

Nonoperative options for articular cartilage injury are pervasive but have not shown to be curative. Recommendations for low-impact exercise and weight loss provide benefit and are a foundation for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Judicious use of NSAIDs and acetaminophen can be appropriate for pain management. Topical NSAIDs may be a treatment option with fewer side effects than its oral counterpart. Additionally, viscosupplementation injections are useful for mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis, whereas short-term pain relief is provided by intra-articular corticosteroid injections. Future studies to individualize treatment options based on patient phenotype and genotype may hold promise.

Efficacy and safety of aceclofenac in osteoarthritis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effects on pain, function, and safety of aceclofenac compared with other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or pain relief medications in patients with osteoarthritis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two investigators independently searched the database. We included randomized controlled trials evaluating efficacy and/or safety of aceclofenac compared with control interventions (NSAIDs or acetaminophen) in patients with osteoarthritis. We did not include placebo, opioid analgesics, NSAID combinations, and topical analgesics for the control groups. We summarized the efficacy data as standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and safety outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI using the inverse variance random effect model. We assessed the heterogeneity by the I² test. We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of the evidence for all outcome parameters.

RESULTS

We included 9 trials (8 double blind and 1 single blind) that evaluated pain (7 trials), function (8 trials) and safety (7 trials). We observed no significant difference in pain reduction between aceclofenac and control interventions [SMD: -0.30 (-0.62, 0.01); I²=88%; GRADE evidence- low]. Aceclofenac was more beneficial than control interventions in improving physical function [SMD: -0.27 (-0.50, -0.03); I²=88%; GRADE evidence- low]. We observed less gastrointestinal adverse events for aceclofenac than in control interventions [RR 0.69 (95% CI: 0.57, 0.83); I²=12%; GRADE evidence- moderate]. We observed no difference in overall adverse events occurrence and dropout rate between aceclofenac and control interventions.

CONCLUSION

We observed that aceclofenac was beneficial over control analgesics for function improvement and to minimize gastrointestinal adverse events. Our findings could be biased due to the heterogeneity of the sample, the fact that the trials were small and methodological issues.

THE EUROPEAN SOCIETY FOR CLINICAL AND ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF OSTEOPOROSIS AND OSTEOARTHRITIS (ESCEO) ALGORITHM FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS IS APPLICABLE TO RUSSIAN CLINICAL PRACTICE: A CONSENSUS STATEMENT OF LEADING RUSSIAN AND ESCEO OSTEOARTHRITIS EXPERTS

The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) treatment algorithm for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA), published in December 2014, provides practical guidance for the prioritization of interventions. This current paper represents an assessment and endorsement of the algorithm by Russian experts in OA for use in Russian clinical practice, with the aim of providing easy-to-follow advice on how to establish a treatment flow in patients with knee OA, in support of the clinicians’ individualized assessment of the patient. Medications recommended by the ESCEO algorithm are available in Russia. In step 1, background maintenance therapy with symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOA) is advised, for which high-quality evidence is provided only for the formulations of patented crystalline glucosamine sulphate (pCGS) (Rottapharm/Meda) and prescription chondroitin sulfate. Paracetamol may be added for rescue analgesia only, due to limited efficacy and increasing safety signals. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may provide additional symptomatic treatment with the same degree of efficacy as oral NSAIDs but without the systemic safety concerns. To be effective, topical NSAIDs must have high bioavailability, and among NSAIDs molecules like etofenamate have high absorption and bioavailability alongside evidence for accumulation in synovial tissues. Oral NSAIDs maintain a central role in step 2 advanced management of persistent symptoms. However, oral NSAIDs are highly heterogeneous in terms of gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety profile, and patient stratification with careful treatment selection is advocated to maximize the risk: benefit ratio. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid as a next step provides sustained clinical benefit with effects lasting up to 6 months after a short-course of weekly injections. As a last step before surgery, the slow titration of sustained-release tramadol, a weak opioid, affords sustained analgesia with improved tolerability.

Hip Osteoarthritis: Etiopathogenesis and Implications for Management

Highly prevalent among the elderly, hip osteoarthritis (OA) carries a heavy burden of disease. Guidelines for the management of hip OA are often extrapolated from knee OA research, despite clear differences in the etiopathogenesis and response to treatments of OA at these sites. We propose that hip OA requires specific attention separate from other OA phenotypes. Our understanding of the etiopathogenesis of hip OA has seen significant advance over the last 15 years, since Ganz and colleagues proposed femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) as an important etiological factor. This narrative review summarizes the current understanding of the etiopathogenesis of hip OA and identifies areas requiring further research. Therapeutic approaches for hip OA are considered in light of the condition’s etiopathogenesis. The evidence for currently adopted management strategies is considered, especially those approaches that may have disease-modifying potential. We propose that shifting the focus of hip OA research and public health intervention to primary prevention and early detection may greatly improve the current management paradigm.

Nonsurgical Management of Osteoarthritis Knee Pain in the Older Adult

Symptomatic knee osteoarthritis is a common complaint of many elderly patients in primary care offices. For those unable or unwilling to undergo knee replacement, the primary practitioners' understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the available treatment modalities for pain relief is critical to successful in-office counseling and expectation management. Treatment requires a multimodal approach of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies to achieve a maximal clinical benefit. The focus of this review is on the nonsurgical options for treatment of knee osteoarthritis in patients aged 65 and older.

Non-surgical treatments for the management of early osteoarthritis

Non-surgical treatments are usually the first choice for the management of knee degeneration, especially in the early osteoarthritis (OA) phase when no clear lesions or combined abnormalities need to be addressed surgically. Early OA may be addressed by a wide range of non-surgical approaches, from non-pharmacological modalities to dietary supplements and pharmacological therapies, as well as physical therapies and novel biological minimally invasive procedures involving injections of various substances to obtain a clinical improvement and possibly a disease-modifying effect. Numerous pharmaceutical agents are able to provide clinical benefit, but no one has shown all the characteristic of an ideal treatment, and side effects have been reported at both systemic and local level. Patients and physicians should have realistic outcome goals in pharmacological treatment, which should be considered together with other conservative measures. Among these, exercise is an effective conservative approach, while physical therapies lack literature support. Even though a combination of these therapeutic options might be the most suitable strategy, there is a paucity of studies focusing on combining treatments, which is the most common clinical scenario. Further studies are needed to increase the limited evidence on non-surgical treatments and their combination, to optimize indications, application modalities, and results with particular focus on early OA. In fact, most of the available evidence regards established OA. Increased knowledge about degeneration mechanisms will help to better target the available treatments and develop new biological options, where preliminary results are promising, especially concerning early disease phases. Specific treatments aimed at improving joint homoeostasis, or even counteracting tissue damage by inducing regenerative processes, might be successful in early OA, where tissue loss and anatomical changes are still at very initial stages.

Physician continuing education to reduce opioid misuse, abuse, and overdose: Many opportunities, few requirements

BACKGROUND

The opioid overdose epidemic in the United States is driven in large part by inappropriate opioid prescribing. Although most American physicians receive little or no training during medical school regarding evidence-based prescribing, substance use disorders, and pain management, some states require continuing medical education (CME) on these topics. We report the results of a systematic legal analysis of such requirements, together with recommendations for improved physician training.

METHODS

To determine the presence and characteristics of CME requirements in the United States, we systematically collected, reviewed, and coded all laws that require such education as a condition of obtaining or renewing a license to practice medicine. Laws or regulations that mandate one-time or ongoing training in topics designed to reduce overdose risk were further characterized using an iterative protocol

RESULTS

Only five states require all or nearly all physicians to obtain CME on topics such as pain management and controlled substance prescribing, and fewer than half require any physicians to obtain such training.

CONCLUSIONS

While not a replacement for improved education in medical school and post-graduate clinical training, evidence-based CME can help improve provider knowledge and practice. Requiring physicians to obtain CME that accurately presents evidence regarding opioid prescribing and related topics may help reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. States and the federal government should also strongly consider requiring such training in medical school and residency.

How does surgery compare with advanced intra-articular therapies in knee osteoarthritis: current thoughts

The objectives of osteoarthritis (OA) management are to reduce pain and inflammation, slow cartilage degradation, improve function and reduce disability. Current strategies for managing knee OA include nonpharmacological interventions, oral pharmacological treatments, localized intra-articular injections, and surgery. It has become evident that the inflammatory response is a key contributor to the development and progression of knee OA. Signaling pathways involving growth factors and cytokines are being investigated for the development of new therapies that target the underlying biological processes causing the disease. This concept of 'molecular orthopedics' enables more patient-centered diagnostic and treatment strategies. In contrast to other conservative therapies, which ultimately only address OA symptoms, intra-articular injections, in particular autologous conditioned serum (ACS), provide benefits that have the potential to outweigh those of established pharmacological treatments and surgery. Surgery has historically been considered the final solution for treatment of knee OA, both by treating physicians and by patients; however, there are increasing concerns regarding the lack of randomized clinical trials providing evidence to support this opinion. Intra-articular injection of ACS has demonstrated efficacy as a treatment for knee OA in a number of studies, with a very low rate of adverse events and side effects, compared with surgery. Treatment with ACS utilizes the release of anti-inflammatory cytokines and regenerative growth factors to support the natural healing processes in the knee, and has the potential to provide a valuable alternative to surgical intervention.

Intra-articular corticosteroid for knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of chronic pain, disability, and decreased quality of life. Despite the long-standing use of intra-articular corticosteroids, there is an ongoing debate about their benefits and safety. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of intra-articular corticosteroids compared with sham or no intervention in people with knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE (from inception to 3 February 2015), checked trial registers, conference proceedings, reference lists, and contacted authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared intra-articular corticosteroids with sham injection or no treatment in people with knee osteoarthritis. We applied no language restrictions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for pain, function, quality of life, joint space narrowing, and risk ratios (RRs) for safety outcomes. We combined trials using an inverse-variance random-effects meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 27 trials (13 new studies) with 1767 participants in this update. We graded the quality of the evidence as 'low' for all outcomes because treatment effect estimates were inconsistent with great variation across trials, pooled estimates were imprecise and did not rule out relevant or irrelevant clinical effects, and because most trials had a high or unclear risk of bias. Intra-articular corticosteroids appeared to be more beneficial in pain reduction than control interventions (SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.22), which corresponds to a difference in pain scores of 1.0 cm on a 10-cm visual analogue scale between corticosteroids and sham injection and translates into a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 8 (95% CI 6 to 13). An I(2) statistic of 68% indicated considerable between-trial heterogeneity. A visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested some asymmetry (asymmetry coefficient -1.21, 95%CI -3.58 to 1.17). When stratifying results according to length of follow-up, benefits were moderate at 1 to 2 weeks after end of treatment (SMD -0.48, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.27), small to moderate at 4 to 6 weeks (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.21), small at 13 weeks (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.00), and no evidence of an effect at 26 weeks (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.11). An I(2) statistic of ≥ 63% indicated a moderate to large degree of between-trial heterogeneity up to 13 weeks after end of treatment (P for heterogeneity≤0.001), and an I(2) of 0% indicated low heterogeneity at 26 weeks (P=0.43). There was evidence of lower treatment effects in trials that randomised on average at least 50 participants per group (P=0.05) or at least 100 participants per group (P=0.013), in trials that used concomittant viscosupplementation (P=0.08), and in trials that used concomitant joint lavage (P≤0.001).Corticosteroids appeared to be more effective in function improvement than control interventions (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.09), which corresponds to a difference in functions scores of -0.7 units on standardised Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) disability scale ranging from 0 to 10 and translates into a NNTB of 10 (95% CI 7 to 33). An I(2) statistic of 69% indicated a moderate to large degree of between-trial heterogeneity. A visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested asymmetry (asymmetry coefficient -4.07, 95% CI -8.08 to -0.05). When stratifying results according to length of follow-up, benefits were small to moderate at 1 to 2 weeks after end of treatment (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.72 to -0.14), small to moderate at 4 to 6 weeks (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.09), and no evidence of an effect at 13 weeks (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.10) or at 26 weeks (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.28). An I(2) statistic of ≥ 62% indicated a moderate to large degree of between-trial heterogeneity up to 13 weeks after end of treatment (P for heterogeneity≤0.004), and an I(2) of 0% indicated low heterogeneity at 26 weeks (P=0.52). We found evidence of lower treatment effects in trials that randomised on average at least 50 participants per group (P=0.023), in unpublished trials (P=0.023), in trials that used non-intervention controls (P=0.031), and in trials that used concomitant viscosupplementation (P=0.06).Participants on corticosteroids were 11% less likely to experience adverse events, but confidence intervals included the null effect (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.23, I(2)=0%). Participants on corticosteroids were 67% less likely to withdraw because of adverse events, but confidence intervals were wide and included the null effect (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.07, I(2)=0%). Participants on corticosteroids were 27% less likely to experience any serious adverse event, but confidence intervals were wide and included the null effect (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.67, I(2)=0%).We found no evidence of an effect of corticosteroids on quality of life compared to control (SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.28, I(2)=0%). There was also no evidence of an effect of corticosteroids on joint space narrowing compared to control interventions (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.46).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Whether there are clinically important benefits of intra-articular corticosteroids after one to six weeks remains unclear in view of the overall quality of the evidence, considerable heterogeneity between trials, and evidence of small-study effects. A single trial included in this review described adequate measures to minimise biases and did not find any benefit of intra-articular corticosteroids.In this update of the systematic review and meta-analysis, we found most of the identified trials that compared intra-articular corticosteroids with sham or non-intervention control small and hampered by low methodological quality. An analysis of multiple time points suggested that effects decrease over time, and our analysis provided no evidence that an effect remains six months after a corticosteroid injection.