Author: Shuaipan Zhang#1,2,3, Ruixin Huang#1,4, Guangxin Guo1,2,3, Lingjun Kong1,4, Jianhua Li1, Qingguang Zhu1,4, Min Fang1,4,5
Affiliation: <sup>1</sup> Tuina Department, Yueyang Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
<sup>2</sup> Tuina Department, Shanghai Municipal Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
<sup>3</sup> School of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
<sup>4</sup> Tuina Department, Institute of Tuina, Shanghai Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
<sup>5</sup> Tuina Department, Shuguang Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Conference/Journal: Front Public Health
Date published: 2023 Jun 8
Other:
Volume ID: 11 , Pages: 1168167 , Special Notes: doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1168167. , Word Count: 339
Objective:
To evaluate the efficacy of Traditional Chinese Exercises (TCEs) in treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA).
Methods:
Four databases without language or publication status restrictions were searched until April 1, 2022. Based on the principle of Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes and Study design, the researchers searched for randomized controlled trials of TCEs in treating KOA. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) pain was defined as the primary outcome, whereas stiffness and physical function were the secondary outcomes. Subsequently, two researchers conducted the process independently, and the data were analyzed using the RevManV.5.3 software.
Results:
Overall, 17 randomized trials involving 1174 participants met the inclusion criteria. The synthesized data of TCEs showed a significant improvement in WOMAC pain score [standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.52 to -0.10; p = 0.004], stiffness score (SMD = -0.63; 95% CI: -1.01 to -0.25; p = 0.001) and physical function score (SMD = -0.38; 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.15; p = 0.001) compared with the control group. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the combined results' stability, which was unstable after excluding articles with greater heterogeneity. A further subgroup analysis showed that it might be the reason for the heterogeneity of the different traditional exercise intervention methods. Additionally, it showed that the Taijiquan group improved pain (SMD = 0.74; 95% CI: -1.09 to 0.38; p < 0.0001; I2 = 50%), stiffness (SMD = -0.67; 95% CI -1.14 to 0.20; p = 0.005) and physical function score (SMD = -0.35; 95% CI: -0.54 to 0.16; p = 0.0003; I2 = 0%) better than the control group. The Baduanjin group improved stiffness (SMD = -1.30; 95% CI: -2.32 to 0.28; p = 0.01) and physical function (SMD = -0.52; 95% CI: -0.97 to 0.07; p = 0.02) better than the control group. However, the other interventions showed no difference compared with the control group.
Conclusion:
This systematic review provides partial evidence of the benefits of TCEs for knee pain and dysfunction. However, due to the heterogeneity of exercise, more high-quality clinical studies should be conducted to verify the efficacy.
Systematic review registration:
https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-4-0154/, identifier: International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) [INPLSY202240154].
Keywords: Traditional Chinese Exercises; WOMAC; knee osteoarthritis; meta-analysis; systematic review.
PMID: 37361162 PMCID: PMC10285305 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1168167