Effects of Whole-Body Vibration Therapy on Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Knee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of disability and medical costs. The effect of whole-body vibration in knee osteoarthritis is controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the effects and safety of whole-body vibration on pain, stiffness, physical function, and muscle strength in patients with knee osteoarthritis.Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and EMBASE databases were searched (date last accessed 1 April 2021) using the key words “vibration” and “knee osteoarthritis”, to identify all randomized controlled trials related to whole-body vibration and knee osteoarthritis. Outcomes related to pain, stiffness, physical function, muscle strength, adverse events were included. The risk of bias and quality were assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration tool and PEDro scale. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Subgroup analysis was performed for low- and high-frequency interventions.Results: A total of 14 randomized controlled trials involving 559 patients with knee osteoarthritis met the inclusion criteria. Nine studies were good-quality trials (PEDro score=6–8), and 5 studies were fairquality trials (PEDro score=4–5). Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. One study showed negative effects of whole-body vibration on knee osteoarthritis. The duration of whole-body vibration ranged from 4 to 24 weeks. Meta-analysis revealed that whole-body vibration with strengthening exercises has a significant treatment effect on pain score (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.46 points, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.20–0.71, p = 0.0004), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC-function) (SMD = 0.51 points, 95% CI = 0.27–0.75, p < 0.0001), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test (SMD = 0.82 points, 95% CI = 0.46–1.18, p < 0.00001), extensor isokinetic peak torque (SMD = 0.65 points, 95% CI = 0.00–1.29, p = 0.05), peak power (SMD = 0.68 points, 95% CI = 0.26–1.10, p = 0.001), and extensor isometric strength (SMD = 0.44 points, 95% CI = 0.13–0.75, p = 0.006). Both low-frequency (10–30 Hz) and highfrequency (30–40 Hz) whole-body vibration were associated with significant changes in pain, physical function, and knee extensor strength (p < 0.05). WBV was not associated with significant changes in stiffness, balance ability, quality of life, and knee flexor strength. No adverse events were reported.Conclusion: Meta-analysis showed that low-frequency and high-frequency whole-body vibration had additional positive effects compared with strengthening exercises alone on pain, knee extensor muscle strength, and physical function in individuals with knee OA. Whole-body vibration with strengthening exercises can be incorporated into treatment protocols. LAY ABSTRACTKnee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of disability and medical costs. Osteoarthritis leads to pain, stiffness, swelling and loss of function, resulting in poor quality of life. Whole-body vibration is a non-invasive treatment that has been proposed to improve muscle strength and physical performance. This analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials showed that, compared with exercise alone, wholebody vibration with exercise had positive effects on pain, physical function, and knee extensor muscle strength in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Based on these findings, we recommend whole-body vibration used together with strengthening exercises for knee osteoarthritis.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,061 | 0,186 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,086 | 0,013 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle