Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Meta-Anal. Aug 26, 2014; 2(3): 78-90
Published online Aug 26, 2014. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.78
Table 5 Summary of findings
OutcomesDifference1 in ultrasound group mean relative to the control group mean (95%CI)No of Participants and knees (studies)Strength of the body of evidence2Inconsistency (I2)Outcome specific risk of bias
Pain VAS; NRS Follow-up: 2-8 wk0.39 standard deviations lower [-0.70-(-0.08)]281 (5 studies)Low36%High risk of bias of the included studies, imprecision due to small sample size and wide CI
Self-reported physical function WOMAC® LK 3.1 Physical function; Follow-up: 2-8 wk2.49 points lower (-0.55-0.14)130 (3 studies)Very low0%High risk of bias of the included studies, imprecision due to very small sample size and wide CI
Walking performance 50 m walk speed (s); 20 m walk speed (s); 6MWT (m) Follow-up: 2-8 wks0.11 standard deviations lower (-0.59-0.37)212 (4 studies)Very low64%High risk of bias in the included studies, imprecision due to small sample size and wide CI, inconsistent