Trial reportBMC complementary medicine and therapies2025
Experiences and perceptions of Chinese patients enrolled in a clinical trial assessing tuina and manual therapies for knee osteoarthritis: a nested qualitative study.
Trial report in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionKOA is a prevalent joint disorder significantly impacting patients' quality of life. Tuina and manual interventions are prioritized in clinical practice within the Chinese healthcare context. Current qualitative studies mostly focus on symptom management and basic disease perceptions, overlooking patient-centered treatment expectations, therapeutic process perceptions, and doctor-patient interaction impacts during manual therapy. This study aims to address these gaps by exploring Chinese KOA patients' experiences, perceptions, and expectations of manual therapy, emphasizing contextual factors affecting therapeutic outcomes and interactions.
methodsParticipants with KOA were sampled using a simple sampling method from a randomized controlled trial of Tuina treatment versus manual physical therapy (MPT). The interviews were conducted by two researchers who have extensive experience interviewing KOA patients, and data were gathered through face-to-face, semi-structured interviews to ensure a high level of information power. Three experienced researchers subsequently analyzed employing thematic analysis to assess patient experiences and outcomes from both treatment modalities.
resultThe study interviewed a total of 61 participants, thematic saturation was reached when interviewing 42 participants, and seven codes along with 5 sub-themes were utilized to depict potential doctor-patient interactions and influencing factors. This process led to the formation of three themes: Understanding and Impact, Treatment Expectations and Satisfaction, and Treatment Goals and Outcomes, which helped in constructing a model to understand the underlying influences among these themes.
conclusionOur study generated three themes-Understanding and Impact, Treatment Expectations and Satisfaction, and Treatment Goals and Outcomes, and developed a manual therapy model based on these themes. The generated model shows the important factors of doctor-patient interaction in KOA manual therapy management. Future research should expand to multidisciplinary and cross-cultural models to align standardized protocols with individualized patient needs.
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.