ReviewCureus2025
Efficacy of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment for Postoperative Recovery Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is widely regarded as one of the most common and successful orthopaedic procedures in the United States, specifically in regard to the treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis of the knee. However, pain and range of motion (ROM) restrictions continue to burden patients in the acute postoperative period following TKA. Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is a safe and non-invasive therapy utilized by osteopathic physicians to treat and heal dysfunctions of the musculoskeletal system. The effectiveness of OMT in enhancing postoperative recovery remains a subject of ongoing debate. This meta-analysis investigates the efficacy of OMT in creating a difference in pain, measured on the numeric rating scale, and ROM in flexion in the acute postoperative period following TKA. Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 153 patients, 74 of them receiving OMT and 79 not receiving OMT, were identified and included in this meta-analysis. In regard to postoperative pain, the mean difference between OMT and non-OMT groups, using the random-effects model, was -0.59 (-1.96; 0.78). This mean difference favors a slightly lower postoperative pain level in the OMT group; however, this fails to reach statistical significance. Moderate to high heterogeneity was appreciated between studies (I²=50.8%), but this failed to reach statistical significance (p=0.1309). In regard to postoperative ROM in flexion, the mean difference between OMT and non-OMT groups, using the random-effects model, was 5.57 (-15.57; 26.70). This mean difference favors a slightly greater postoperative ROM in the OMT group; however, this fails to reach statistical significance. High heterogeneity was appreciated between studies (I²=89.9%), which proved to be statistically significant (p<0.0001). Given the overall similarity in patient recovery metrics, the effectiveness of OMT in improving postoperative pain and ROM following TKA cannot be proven at this time. However, the potential for clinical significance and minor improvements should be considered. Additional high-quality RCTs and comprehensive meta-analyses are needed to further define the role of OMT in the postoperative period following orthopaedic 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.