ArticleJAMA network open2022
Comparison of Face-to-Face vs Digital Delivery of an Osteoarthritis Treatment Program for Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Behavioral Therapy-Based Digital Interventions for Treating Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- A Telemedicine App for Nonrigid Facial Rehabilitation Training Enhanced by Efficient Fully Convolutional Neural Network With Residual Network (EffiFCNN-ResNet) to Improve Accessibility for Patients With Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Trial
- Effects of a Computer Vision-Based Exercise Application for People With Knee Osteoarthritis: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Trial
- Efficacy of the mHealth-Based Exercise Intervention re.flex for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2024Trial
- Combined Digital Interventions for Pain Reduction in Patients Undergoing Knee Replacement: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Virtual or In-Person: Does It Matter? Comparing Pain, Function, Quality of Life, Self-Efficacy, and Physical Function Outcomes of Virtual, Hybrid, and In-Person Education and Exercise Program Participants.Arthritis care & research · 2026Article
- Baseline pain medication is associated with longer duration of high adherence in a three-month digital treatment program for hip and knee osteoarthritis.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2026Article
- Video-based musculoskeletal examination of the foot and ankle: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- App-based exercise intervention versus supervised exercise therapy for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis-the randomised noninferiority DigiOA trial.EULAR rheumatology open · 2025Article
- Article
- Reliability of digitally instructed self-reported 30-second chair stand test for lower extremity function.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2025Article
- Frequent use of prescription NSAIDs among people with knee or hip osteoarthritis despite contraindications to or precautions with NSAIDs.Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2024Article
- Patient acceptable symptom state and treatment failure threshold values for work productivity and activity Impairment and EQ-5D-5L in osteoarthritis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Sex and age differences in the patient-reported outcome measures and adherence to an osteoarthritis digital self-management intervention.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2024Article
- Interpretation threshold values for patient-reported outcomes in patients participating in a digitally delivered first-line treatment program for hip or knee osteoarthritis.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Digital care platforms have been introduced, but there is limited evidence for their efficacy compared with traditional face-to-face treatment modalities. Objective: To compare mean pain reduction among individuals with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee or hip who underwent face-to-face vs digital first-line intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based cohort study included all persons with knee or hip osteoarthritis who participated in structured first-line treatment for osteoarthritis in a primary care setting in Sweden. Inclusion criteria were as follows: the treatment was delivered face-to-face or digitally between April 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019; patients provided 3-month follow-up data for pain; and patients had program adherence of at least 80%. Data analysis was conducted in March 2021. Exposures: Participants completed a 3-month intervention, including education and exercise for hip or knee osteoarthritis, with program adherence of 80% or higher, delivered face-to-face or by a digital application. Main Outcomes and Measures: Difference in change in joint pain (11-point numeric rating scale, with 0 indicating no pain and 10, the worst possible pain) between baseline and 3-month follow-up between the 2 intervention modalities. A minimal clinically important difference in pain change between groups was predefined as 1 point. Secondary outcomes were walking difficulties, health-related quality of life, willingness to undergo joint surgery, and fear avoidance behavior. Results: A total of 6946 participants (mean [SD] age, 67 [9] years; 4952 [71%] women; 4424 [64%] knee OA; 2504 [36%] hip OA) were included, with 4237 (61%) receiving face-to-face treatment and 2709 (39%) receiving digital treatment. Both the face-to-face (mean change, -1.10 [95% CI -1.17 to -1.02] points) and digital interventions (mean change, -1.87 [95% CI, -1.94 to -1.79] points) resulted in a clinically important pain reduction at 3 months. Participants in the digitally delivered intervention experienced a larger estimated improvement at 3 months (adjusted mean difference, -0.93 [95% CI, -1.04 to -0.81] points). Results of secondary outcomes were broadly consistent with main outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: This Swedish national registry-based cohort study showed that people with knee or hip OA participating in first-line intervention experienced clinically relevant improvements in pain, whether delivered face-to-face or digitally. The increased benefit of digital delivery compared with face-to-face delivery was of uncertain clinical importance.
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.