Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee
Belinda J Lawford,Michelle Hall,Rana S Hinman,Martin Van der Esch,Alison R Harmer,Libby Spiers,Alex Kimp,Andrea Dell'Isola,Kim L Bennell
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004376.pub4
IF: 8.4
2024-12-04
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Abstract:Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major public health issue causing chronic pain, impaired physical function, and reduced quality of life. As there is no cure, self‐management of symptoms via exercise is recommended by all current international clinical guidelines. This review updates one published in 2015. We aimed to assess the effects of land‐based exercise for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) by comparing: 1) exercise versus attention control or placebo; 2) exercise versus no treatment, usual care, or limited education; 3) exercise added to another co‐intervention versus the co‐intervention alone. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), together with reference lists, from the date of the last search (1st May 2013) until 4 January 2024, unrestricted by language. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated exercise for knee OA versus a comparator listed above. Our outcomes of interest were pain severity, physical function, quality of life, participant‐reported treatment success, adverse events, and study withdrawals. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for systematic reviews of interventions. We included 139 trials (12,468 participants): 30 (3065 participants) compared exercise to attention control or placebo; 60 (4834 participants) compared exercise with usual care, no intervention or limited education; and 49 (4569 participants) evaluated exercise added to another intervention (e.g. weight loss diet, physical therapy, detailed education) versus that intervention alone. Interventions varied substantially in duration, ranging from 2 to 104 weeks. Most of the trials were at unclear or high risk of bias, in particular, performance bias (94% of trials), detection bias (94%), selective reporting bias (68%), selection bias (57%), and attrition bias (48%). Exercise versus attention control/placebo Compared with attention control/placebo, low‐certainty evidence indicates exercise may result in a slight improvement in pain immediately post‐intervention (mean 8.70 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.70 to 11.70; 28 studies, 2873 participants). Moderate‐certainty evidence indicates exercise likely results in an improvement in physical function (mean 11.27 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 7.64 to 15.09; 24 studies, 2536 participants), but little to no improvement in quality of life (mean 6.06 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI −0.13 to 12.26; 6 studies, 454 participants). There was moderate‐certainty evidence that exercise likely increases participant‐reported treatment success (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.92; 2 studies 364 participants), and likely does not increase study withdrawals (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.26; 29 studies, 2907 participants). There was low‐certainty evidence that exercise may not increase adverse events (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.62 to 6.58; 11 studies, 1684 participants). Exercise versus no treatment/usual care/limited education Compared with no treatment/usual care/limited education, low‐certainty evidence indicates exercise may result in an improvement in pain immediately post‐intervention (mean 13.14 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 10.36 to 15.91; 56 studies, 4184 participants). Moderate‐certainty evidence indicates exercise likely results in an improvement in physical function (mean 12.53 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 9.74 to 15.31; 54 studies, 4352 participants) and a slight improvement in quality of life (mean 5.37 points better (on a scale of to 100), 95% CI 3.19 to 7.54; 28 studies, 2328 participants). There was low‐certainty evidence that exercise may result in no difference in participant‐reported treatment success (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.49; 3 studies, 405 participants). There was moderate‐certainty evidence that exercise likely results in no difference in study withdrawals (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.20; 53 studies, 4408 participants). There was low‐certainty evidence that exercise may increase adverse events (RR 3.17, 95% CI 1.17 to 8.57; 18 studies, 1557 participants). Exercise added to another co‐intervention versus the co‐intervention alone Moderate‐certainty evidence indicates that exercise when added to a co‐intervention likely results in improvements in pain immediately post‐intervention compared to the co‐intervention alone (mean 10.43 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 8.06 to 12.79; 47 studies, 4441 participants). It also likely results in a slight improvement in physical function (mean 9.66 points better, 95% CI 7.48 to 11.97 (on a 0 to 100 scale); 44 studies, 4381 participants) and quality of life (mean 4.22 points better (on a 0 to 100 scale), 95% CI 1.36 to -Abstract Truncated-
medicine, general & internal