OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of exercise and its potential determinants for pain, function, performance, and quality of life (QoL) in knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS: We searched 9 electronic databases (AMED, CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE Ovid, PEDro, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Google Scholar) for reports of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing exercise-only interventions with usual care. The search was performed from inception up to December 2017 with no language restriction. The effect size (ES), with its 95% confidence interval (CI), was calculated on the basis of between-group standardised mean differences. The primary endpoint was at or nearest to 8 weeks. Other outcome time points were grouped into intervals, from<1 month to≥18 months, for time-dependent effects analysis. Potential determinants were explored by subgroup analyses. Level of significance was set at P≤0.10.
RESULTS: Data from 77 RCTs (6472 participants) confirmed statistically significant exercise benefits for pain (ES 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.68), function (0.50, 0.38-0.63), performance (0.46, 0.35-0.57), and QoL (0.21, 0.11-0.31) at or nearest to 8 weeks. Across all outcomes, the effects appeared to peak around 2 months and then gradually decreased and became no better than usual care after 9 months. Better pain relief was reported by trials investigating participants who were younger (mean age<60 years), had knee OA, and were not awaiting joint replacement surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Exercise significantly reduces pain and improves function, performance and QoL in people with knee and hip OA as compared with usual care at 8 weeks. The effects are maximal around 2 months and thereafter slowly diminish, being no better than usual care at 9 to 18 months. Participants with younger age, knee OA and not awaiting joint replacement may benefit more from exercise therapy. These potential determinants, identified by study-level analyses, may have implied ecological bias and need to be confirmed with individual patient data.
METHODS: This study will include only RCTs published in peer-reviewed journals. A systematic search will be conducted in several electronic databases and other relevant online resources. No limitations are imposed on language or publication date. Participants must be explicitly identified by authors as having OA. Interventions that involved exercise or comparators in any form will be included. Pain is the primary outcome of interest; secondary outcomes will include function and quality of life measures. Quality assessment of studies will be based on the modified Cochrane's risk of bias assessment tool. At least two investigators will be involved throughout all stages of screening and data acquisition. Conflicts will be resolved through discussion. Conventional meta-analysis will be performed based on random effects model and network meta-analysis on a Bayesian model. Subgroup analysis will also be conducted based on study, patient and disease characteristics.
DISCUSSION: This study will provide for the first time comprehensive research evidence for the relative efficacy of different exercise regimens for treatment of OA. We will use network meta-analysis of existing RCT data to answer this question.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016033865.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to investigate the relative efficacy of different exercises (aerobic, mind-body, strengthening, flexibility/skill, or mixed) for improving pain, function, performance and quality of life (QoL) for knee and hip OA at, or nearest to, 8 weeks.
METHODS: We searched nine electronic databases up until December 2017 for randomised controlled trials that compared exercise with usual care or with another exercise type. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to estimate the relative effect size (ES) and corresponding 95% credibility interval (CrI) (PROSPERO registration: CRD42016033865).
FINDINGS: We identified and analysed 103 trials (9134 participants). Aerobic exercise was most beneficial for pain (ES 1.11; 95% CrI 0.69, 1.54) and performance (1.05; 0.63, 1.48). Mind-body exercise, which had pain benefit equivalent to that of aerobic exercise (1.11; 0.63, 1.59), was the best for function (0.81; 0.27, 1.36). Strengthening and flexibility/skill exercises improved multiple outcomes at a moderate level. Mixed exercise was the least effective for all outcomes and had significantly less pain relief than aerobic and mind-body exercises. The trend was significant for pain (p = 0.01), but not for function (p = 0.07), performance (p = 0.06) or QoL (p = 0.65).
CONCLUSION: The effect of exercise varies according to the type of exercise and target outcome. Aerobic or mind-body exercise may be the best for pain and function improvements. Strengthening and flexibility/skill exercises may be used for multiple outcomes. Mixed exercise is the least effective and the reason for this merits further investigation.
DESIGN: Network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science from database inception to January 2022.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing exercise therapy with oral NSAIDs and paracetamol directly or indirectly in knee or hip OA.
RESULTS: A total of n=152 RCTs (17 431 participants) were included. For pain relief, there was no difference between exercise and oral NSAIDs and paracetamol at or nearest to 4 (standardised mean difference (SMD)=-0.12, 95% credibility interval (CrI) -1.74 to 1.50; n=47 RCTs), 8 (SMD=0.22, 95% CrI -0.05 to 0.49; n=2 RCTs) and 24 weeks (SMD=0.17, 95% CrI -0.77 to 1.12; n=9 RCTs). Similarly, there was no difference between exercise and oral NSAIDs and paracetamol in functional improvement at or nearest to 4 (SMD=0.09, 95% CrI -1.69 to 1.85; n=40 RCTs), 8 (SMD=0.06, 95% CrI -0.20 to 0.33; n=2 RCTs) and 24 weeks (SMD=0.05, 95% CrI -1.15 to 1.24; n=9 RCTs).
CONCLUSIONS: Exercise has similar effects on pain and function to that of oral NSAIDs and paracetamol. Given its excellent safety profile, exercise should be given more prominence in clinical care, especially in older people with comorbidity or at higher risk of adverse events related to NSAIDs and paracetamol.CRD42019135166.
METHODS: We used robust statistical methods including the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm) to analyse a database of data for 7065 site-years and estimate the number of maternal deaths from all causes in 188 countries between 1990 and 2013. We estimated the number of pregnancy-related deaths caused by HIV on the basis of a systematic review of the relative risk of dying during pregnancy for HIV-positive women compared with HIV-negative women. We also estimated the fraction of these deaths aggravated by pregnancy on the basis of a systematic review. To estimate the numbers of maternal deaths due to nine different causes, we identified 61 sources from a systematic review and 943 site-years of vital registration data. We also did a systematic review of reports about the timing of maternal death, identifying 142 sources to use in our analysis. We developed estimates for each country for 1990-2013 using Bayesian meta-regression. We estimated 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) for all values.
FINDINGS: 292,982 (95% UI 261,017-327,792) maternal deaths occurred in 2013, compared with 376,034 (343,483-407,574) in 1990. The global annual rate of change in the MMR was -0·3% (-1·1 to 0·6) from 1990 to 2003, and -2·7% (-3·9 to -1·5) from 2003 to 2013, with evidence of continued acceleration. MMRs reduced consistently in south, east, and southeast Asia between 1990 and 2013, but maternal deaths increased in much of sub-Saharan Africa during the 1990s. 2070 (1290-2866) maternal deaths were related to HIV in 2013, 0·4% (0·2-0·6) of the global total. MMR was highest in the oldest age groups in both 1990 and 2013. In 2013, most deaths occurred intrapartum or postpartum. Causes varied by region and between 1990 and 2013. We recorded substantial variation in the MMR by country in 2013, from 956·8 (685·1-1262·8) in South Sudan to 2·4 (1·6-3·6) in Iceland.
INTERPRETATION: Global rates of change suggest that only 16 countries will achieve the MDG 5 target by 2015. Accelerated reductions since the Millennium Declaration in 2000 coincide with increased development assistance for maternal, newborn, and child health. Setting of targets and associated interventions for after 2015 will need careful consideration of regions that are making slow progress, such as west and central Africa.
FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.