Summary of findings 4. Valgus knee brace compared with lateral wedge insole for varus medial osteoarthritis of the knee.
| Valgus knee brace compared with lateral wedge insole for varus medial osteoarthritis of the knee | |||||
|
Patient or population: patients with varus medial osteoarthritis of the knee Settings: general hospital Intervention: valgus knee brace Comparison: lateral wedge insole | |||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Number of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | ||||
| Lateral wedge insole | Valgus knee brace | ||||
|
Pain VAS: scale from 0 to 10 Follow‐up: 6 months (Higher score is worse) |
Mean pain score in control groups was 4.8 |
Mean pain score in intervention groups was 0.2 lower (1.15 lower to 0.75 higher) |
91 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b |
MD = ‐0.20 (95% CI ‐1.15 to 0.75) Absolute percent change = ‐2.0% (95% CI ‐11.5 to 7.5) Relative percent change = ‐4.2% (95% CI ‐24.0 to 15.6) NNTB = not statistically significant |
| Stiffness | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | See comment | Outcome not reported in included studies |
|
Function WOMAC: scale from 0 to 100 Follow‐up: 6 months (Higher score is better) |
Mean function score in control groups was 50.7 |
Mean function score in intervention groups was 0.1 higher (7.26 lower to 0.75 higher) |
91 (1 study) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b |
MD = 0.10 (95% CI ‐7.26 to 7.46) Absolute percent change = 0.1% (95% CI ‐7.26 to 0.75) Relative percent change = 0.2% (95% CI ‐14.3 to 1.5) NNTB = not statistically significant |
| Health‐related quality of life | See comment | See comment | Not estimablec | See comment | Outcome not reported in included studies |
| Treatment failure | See comment | See comment | Not estimablec | See comment | Outcome not reported in included studies |
| Serious adverse events | See comment | See comment | Not estimablec | See comment | Outcome not reported in included studies |
| Total number of adverse events | See comment | See comment | Not estimablec | See comment | Outcome not reported in included studies |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; NNTB: number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome; RR: Risk ratio. | |||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | |||||
aDowngraded for imprecision: Results were based on only one study with 91 participants.
bDowngraded for limitations in design and implementation of available studies suggesting high likelihood of bias.
cNo useful data were available.