Neuromuscular electrical stimulation in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Giggins O, Fullen B, Coughlan G · Clinical Rehabilitation

WOMAC function favoured stimulation by 5.31 points (95% CI -10.22 to -0.40, 233 patients) and WOMAC pain by 1.32 points (95% CI -2.40 to -0.23, 225 patients). Walking tests did not move (SMD 0.23, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.80, I2 60%, Z 0.81, P 0.42). The authors grade the whole body of evidence level D, inconsistent, and call the role of stimulation in knee osteoarthritis ambiguous.

Population

409 people with osteoarthritis across nine randomised trials and one controlled clinical trial, searched to January 2011; six trials fed the pooling

Intervention

Surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation of the quadriceps

Comparator

Sham stimulation, exercise or usual care, depending on the trial

Limitations

Author-reported: few trials, heterogeneous protocols, English-language only, and one trial dropped because its data could not be obtained. In one included trial the same gains appeared after sham stimulation. The reported WOMAC function interval differs between the text (-10.32) and the forest plot (-10.22); the plot's value is quoted here. Searched only to 2011. No specific grant funding.