MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036491373 · doi:10.1002/acr.21596

American College of Rheumatology 2012 recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies in osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, and knee

2012· review· en· W2036491373 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Marc C. Hochberg, Roy D. Altman, Karine Toupin‐April, Maria Benkhalti, Jessie McGowan, Tanveer Towheed, Vivian Welch, George A. Wells, Peter Tugwell

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsMedicineModalitiesPhysical therapyOsteoarthritisHydrotherapyRheumatologyPopulationInternal medicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To update the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2000 recommendations for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) and develop new recommendations for hand OA. METHODS: A list of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic modalities commonly used to manage knee, hip, and hand OA as well as clinical scenarios representing patients with symptomatic hand, hip, and knee OA were generated. Systematic evidence-based literature reviews were conducted by a working group at the Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, and updated by ACR staff to include additions to bibliographic databases through December 31, 2010. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, a formal process to rate scientific evidence and to develop recommendations that are as evidence based as possible, was used by a Technical Expert Panel comprised of various stakeholders to formulate the recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic modalities for OA of the hand, hip, and knee. RESULTS: Both “strong” and “conditional” recommendations were made for OA management. Modalities conditionally recommended for the management of hand OA include instruction in joint protection techniques, provision of assistive devices, use of thermal modalities and trapeziometacarpal joint splints, and use of oral and topical nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), tramadol, and topical capsaicin. Nonpharmacologic modalities strongly recommended for the management of knee OA were aerobic, aquatic, and/or resistance exercises as well as weight loss for overweight patients. Nonpharmacologic modalities conditionally recommended for knee OA included medial wedge insoles for valgus knee OA, subtalar strapped lateral insoles for varus knee OA, medially directed patellar taping, manual therapy, walking aids, thermal agents, tai chi, self management programs, and psychosocial interventions. Pharmacologic modalities conditionally recommended for the initial management of patients with knee OA included acetaminophen, oral and topical NSAIDs, tramadol, and intraarticular corticosteroid injections; intraarticular hyaluronate injections, duloxetine, and opioids were conditionally recommended in patients who had an inadequate response to initial therapy. Opioid analgesics were strongly recommended in patients who were either not willing to undergo or had contraindications for total joint arthroplasty after having failed medical therapy. Recommendations for hip OA were similar to those for the management of knee OA. CONCLUSION: These recommendations are based on the consensus judgment of clinical experts from a wide range of disciplines, informed by available evidence, balancing the benefits and harms of both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic modalities, and incorporating their preferences and values. It is hoped that these recommendations will be utilized by health care providers involved in the management of patients with OA.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.084
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0140.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3,083
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207