Skip to main content

Table 1 Study characteristics and the distribution of trials for each intervention providing data within 4 weeks, included patients on active treatment, Q-values from heterogeneity tests, mean methodological scores, mean age of patients and baseline pain on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). (*) One trial with electroacupuncture used too low electrical stimulation intensity according to optimal treatment criteria (Berman et al. 2004), and consequently was classified as manual acupuncture.

From: Short-term efficacy of physical interventions in osteoarthritic knee pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled trials

Type of intervention

Total number of trials

Total number of patients

Number of trials with optimal treatment

Number of patients receiving optimal treatment

Mean methodological quality [range] (max score 5)

Mean age (years)

Q-values and p-values in hetero-geneity tests

Mean baseline pain on 100 mm VAS †

TENS including IF

11

425

7

277

3.3 [1–5]

63.6

60.8 (p < 0.001)

63.8

Electro-acupuncture

3

242

3

242

3.6 [3–5]

62.9

1.1 (p = 0.58)

62.7

Manual acupuncture

4

691

4

691

3.9 [3–5]

66.1

4.5 (p = 0.34)

54.7

Low Level Laser therapy

8

343

5

222

3.5 [2–5]

66.9

36.4 (p < 0.001)

66.7

Pulsed electromagnetic fields

7

487

7

487

4.4 [3–5]

64.2

9 (p = 0.18)

63.3

Ultrasound

1

74

1

74

4

67.5

n.a.

53.0

Static magnets

2

172

2

172

4 [4]

65.6

1.9 (p = 0.22)

59.7

Total and means

36

2434

24

2165

3.8

65.1

 

62.9†

  1. * = Mean † = Weighted mean