Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28267751›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2017

Cost-effectiveness of adjunct non-pharmacological interventions for osteoarthritis of the knee.

Beth Woods, Andrea Manca, Helen Weatherly, Pedro Saramago, Eleftherios Sideris, Christina Giannopoulou, Stephen Rice, Mark Corbett, Andrew Vickers, Matthew Bowes and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05096806 (Effects of Semi-standarized Acupuncture in Chronical Symptomatic Osteoarthritis of the Knee Through), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
43.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05096806 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Semi-standarized Acupuncture in Chronical Symptomatic Osteoarthritis of the Knee Through: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversitat de GironaRan2022 to 2024Enrolled56ConditionsOsteoarthritis, KneeArmsAcupuncture, TENS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A modern way to teach and practice manual therapy.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Beth WoodsCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Andrea MancaCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Helen WeatherlyCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Pedro SaramagoCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Eleftherios SiderisCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Christina GiannopoulouCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Stephen RiceCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Mark CorbettCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Andrew VickersDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States of America.
Matthew BowesYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, York, United Kingdom.
Hugh MacPhersonDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Mark SculpherCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
University of York · GBMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USYork Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Acupuncture Trialists' Collaboration: meta-analysis of chronic pain trialsR01AT006794 · NCCIH · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI VICKERS, ANDREW J · 2011 to 2015
$1.6M
Acupuncture Trialists' Collaboration: meta-analysis of chronic pain trialsR21AT004189 · NCCIH · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI VICKERS, ANDREW J · 2008 to 2010
$604k
Department of Health CDF-2009-02-21Department of Health RP-PG-0707-10186NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT006794NCCIH NIH HHS R21 AT004189NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited information on the costs and benefits of alternative adjunct non-pharmacological treatments for knee osteoarthritis and little guidance on which should be prioritised for commissioning within the NHS. This study estimates the costs and benefits of acupuncture, braces, heat treatment, insoles, interferential therapy, laser/light therapy, manual therapy, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, pulsed electrical stimulation, pulsed electromagnetic fields, static magnets and transcutaneous electrical nerve Stimulation (TENS), based on all relevant data, to facilitate a more complete assessment of value.

methodsData from 88 randomised controlled trials including 7,507 patients were obtained from a systematic review. The studies reported a wide range of outcomes. These were converted into EQ-5D index values using prediction models, and synthesised using network meta-analysis. Analyses were conducted including firstly all trials and secondly only trials with low risk of selection bias. Resource use was estimated from trials, expert opinion and the literature. A decision analytic model synthesised all evidence to assess interventions over a typical treatment period (constant benefit over eight weeks or linear increase in effect over weeks zero to eight and dissipation over weeks eight to 16).

resultsWhen all trials are considered, TENS is cost-effective at thresholds of £20-30,000 per QALY with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,690 per QALY vs. usual care. When trials with a low risk of selection bias are considered, acupuncture is cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £13,502 per QALY vs. TENS. The results of the analysis were sensitive to varying the intensity, with which interventions were delivered, and the magnitude and duration of intervention effects on EQ-5D.

conclusionsUsing the £20,000 per QALY NICE threshold results in TENS being cost-effective if all trials are considered. If only higher quality trials are considered, acupuncture is cost-effective at this threshold, and thresholds down to £14,000 per QALY.

Indexed as

Physical Therapy ModalitiesCombined Modality TherapyCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleOsteoarthritis, KneeQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID28267751
PMCPMC5340388
OpenAlexW2594593698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.