Trial reportClinical rheumatology2021
Assessment of patient satisfaction, functionality, and quality of life after ultrasound-guided knee intervention: a prospective study.
Trial report in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound-guided versus blind arthrocentesis in knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in early and middle stages: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of autologous adipose-derived stem cells for knee osteoarthritis in the elderly population: A systematic review.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024Review
- Comparison of ultrasound guidance with landmark guidance for symptomatic benefits in knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine · 2024Review
- Ultrasonography in rheumatology: time to learn from patient views.Clinical rheumatology · 2023Observational
- Clinical examination, ultrasound assessment and aspiration of knee effusion in primary knee osteoarthritis patients.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Clinical indications for image-guided interventional procedures in the musculoskeletal system: a Delphi-based consensus paper from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology (ESSR)-part V, knee.European radiology · 2022Article
- The Emerging Era of Interventional Imaging in Rheumatology: An Overview During the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2022Review
- Comparison of a Novel Muscle Training Device with Conventional Rehabilitation Training in Motor Dysfunction of Lower Limb Patients: A Pilot Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe use of ultrasound (US) guidance for the injection and aspiration of joints has improved accuracy. The aim of this study was to determine if differences exist in the level of patient satisfaction, functionality, and the quality of life in adult patients receiving US-guided (USG) versus landmark-guided (LMG) knee procedures.
methodsThis prospective, randomized study enrolled 41 patients undergoing knee procedures to USG or LMG groups. visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), and patient satisfaction score on a 5-point Likert scale were measured pre-procedure, immediate (< 30 min) and late (4-6 weeks) post-procedure.
resultsThirty-seven patients were included in the final analysis after exclusion of 4 dropouts (18 in LMG arm, 19 in USG arm). Compared with LMG group, patients in the USG group had significantly better improvement in pain immediately (VAS 1.63 ± 1.6 (95% CI 0.91, 2.35) vs 4.05 ± 2.5 (95% CI 2.90, 4.62), p = 0.001) and later post-procedure (VAS 2.68 ± 2.0 (95% CI 1.78, 3.58) vs 6.38 ± 3.8 (95% CI 4.62, 8.14) p = 0.004) and satisfaction scores immediately (4.89 ± 0.3 (95% CI 4.76, 5.02) vs 4.11 ± 1.0 (95% CI 3.65, 4.57), p = 0.002) as well as delayed post-procedure (4.52 ± 0.9 (95% CI 4.12, 4.92) vs 3.38 ± 1.6 (95% CI 2.64, 4.12), p = 0.028).
conclusionUSG knee procedures were associated with higher patient satisfaction, both immediately after the procedure and after 4-6 weeks compared with LMG knee procedures. Key Points •This prospective study is the first one to look at patient satisfaction as an outcome measure after intra-articular steroids knee injections. •USG (US-guided) knee procedures were associated with higher patient satisfaction compared with LMG (landmark-guided) knee procedures. •USG knee procedures resulted in greater improvement in symptoms, pain, and quality of life scales after 4-6 weeks compared with LMG knee procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.