Effects of therapeutic ultrasound for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To assess the effectiveness and safety of therapeutic ultrasound with sham ultrasound on pain relief and functional improvement in knee osteoarthritis patients. As phonophoresis is a unique therapeutic ultrasound, we also compared the effects of phonophoresis with conventional non-drug ultrasound. Data sources: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials from inception up to June 2019. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing therapeutic ultrasound with sham ultrasound in knee osteoarthritis patients were included. Phonophoresis in the experimental and control groups were compared through conventional ultrasound, and corresponding trials were also included. Two reviewers independently identified eligible studies and extracted data. Risk of bias assessments and therapeutic ultrasound safety assessments were also performed. Results: Fifteen studies including three phonophoresis-related studies with 1074 patients were included. Meta-analyses demonstrated that therapeutic ultrasound significantly relieved pain ( P < 0.00001) and reduced the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) physical function score ( P = 0.03). In addition, therapeutic ultrasound increased the active range of motion ( P < 0.00001) and reduced the Lequesne index ( P < 0.00001). Subgroup analysis of phonophoresis ultrasound illustrated significant differences on the visual analogue scale ( P = 0.009), but no significant differences on WOMAC pain subscales ( P = 0.10), and total WOMAC scores were observed ( P = 0.30). There was no evidence to suggest that ultrasound was unsafe treatment. Conclusions: Therapeutic ultrasound is a safe treatment to relieve pain and improve physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, phonophoresis does not produce additional benefits to functional improvement, but may relieve pain compared to conventional non-drug ultrasound.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".