Acupuncture for treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A clinical practice guideline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CLINICAL QUESTION: Is acupuncture effective in treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA)? CURRENT PRACTICE: Although increasingly used in the clinical setting, acupuncture is not mentioned or weakly recommended in guidelines for the treatment of KOA. RECOMMENDATIONS: We suggest acupuncture rather than no treatment in adult KOA (weak recommendation, moderate certainty evidence), and acupuncture combined with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) rather than acupuncture alone when KOA symptoms are severe (weak recommendation, moderate certainty evidence), with duration of acupuncture for 4-8 weeks depending on KOA severity and treatment response (weak recommendation, moderate certainty evidence), and discussing with patients in shared decision-making. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED: This rapid recommendation was developed following the Making GRADE the Irresistible Choice (MAGIC) methodological framework. First, the clinical specialist identified the topic of recommendation and demand for evidence. Then the independent evidence synthesis group performed a systematic review to summarize available evidence and evaluate the evidence using the GRADE approach. Finally, the clinical specialist group produced recommendations for practice through a consensus procedure. THE EVIDENCE: The linked systematic review and meta-analysis included 9422 KOA patients, 61.1% of whom were women. The median mean age was 61.8 years. Compared with no treatment, acupuncture had beneficial effect on KOA in improving the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total score (moderate certainty evidence), and WOMAC pain (very low certainty evidence), WOMAC stiffness (low certainty evidence), and WOMAC function (low certainty evidence) subscale scores. Compared with usual care, acupuncture improved WOMAC stiffness subscale score (moderate certainty evidence). Subgroup analyses showed different effects in the improvement of WOMAC total scores by different durations of acupuncture and whether acupuncture combined with NSAIDs, but no difference between manual acupuncture and electroacupuncture was found. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS: Compared with no treatment, acupuncture is suggested to reduce pain, stiffness, and disfunction in KOA patients, ultimately improving the patient's health status. Acupuncture can be used as an alternative therapy when usual care is ineffective or there are adverse reactions so that patients can no longer continue the treatment. Manual acupuncture or electroacupuncture is suggested for 4-8 weeks to improve the health status of KOA. The patient's values and preferences should be considered when selecting acupuncture for KOA treatment.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".