Table 2.

Outcomes of analysis

Ref.	Potential bias	Results as reported	Crossovers n (%)	Treatment success by group
Herrlin et al[6,7]	Selection	APM group showed 9-point greater improvement in KOOS pain scores (NS)	13/49 (27%) from PT to APM	APM - 42/47 (89%)
	Detection			PT - 34/49 (69%)
	Transfer			(P = 0.023)
Katz et al[8]	Selection	APM group showed 2.4-point greater improvement in WOMAC scores (NS)	51/177 (29%) from PT to APM at 6 mo post-op	APM - 108/161 (67%)
	Performance			PT - 74/169 (44%)
	Detection			(P < 0.0001)
	Transfer
Yim et al[10]	Selection	APM group showed 0.1-point greater improvement in Lysholm scores (NS)	1/52 (2%) from PT to APM	APM - 45/50 (90%)
	Detection			PT - 48/52 (92%)
				(P = 0.739)
Sihvonen et al[9]	Narrow generalizability	Sham surgery group showed 2.5-point greater improvement in WOMET scores (NS)	5/76 (6.6%) from sham to APM	APM - 49/70 (70%)
				Sham - 51/76 (67%)
				(P = 0.725)
Gauffin et al[18]	Performance	APM group showed 10.6-point greater improvement on KOOS Pain scores (P = 0.004)	16/75 (21%) from PT to APM	APM - 62/74 (84%)
	Detection		9/75 (12%) from APM to PT	PT - 36/56 (64%)
	Transfer			(P = 0.010)

APM: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy; NS: Not statistically significant; KOOS: Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome; WOMAC: Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index; WOMET: Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool; PT: Physical therapy.