ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Treatments for Osgood Schlatter Disease: A Systematic Review of the Literature.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comprehensive management of the adolescent athlete with osgood-schlatter disease: a multidimensional approach.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Osgood-Schlatter Disease (OSD) is an overuse injury causing pain and inflammation at the tibial tubercle, usually in skeletally immature patients. Various treatments are available, including surgical and nonsurgical approaches. Purpose: To review the literature focusing on the clinical outcomes of different treatments for OSD. Study Design: Scoping review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Under PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a search was performed in June 2024 with PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Trials, totaling 349 initial articles. Data were collected on patient demographics, treatments, clinical outcomes, and complication rates. Bias was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies and risk of bias 2.0 tools. Results: Fifteen studies encompassing 712 patients were included and categorized into nonoperative (n = 7), injection-based (n = 4), and surgical (n = 6) treatment groups. Among injection studies, full recovery rates ranged from 31.8% to 84.3%, with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and Tegner Activity Scale (TAS) scores as high as 94.3 and 6.3, respectively, after treatment. Dextrose and platelet-rich plasma injections demonstrated no reported complications. Nonoperative treatments, including physical therapy, immobilization, and supportive care, showed full recovery of activities of daily living (ADL) in 14.3% to 100% of cases. Complication rates for nonoperative treatments ranged from 0% to 66.7%, most commonly involving quadriceps atrophy and skin irritation. Surgical treatments were typically reserved for refractory cases and achieved return to ADL in 79% to 100% of patients. Postoperative Lysholm scores ranged from 96.9 to 99.0, and TAS scores ranged from 6.2 to 8.5. However, complications were reported in 5 of 6 surgical studies, with rates ranging from 0% to 75.8%, including infections, hypertrophic scarring, and residual pain. Conclusion: Our systematic review showed that nonoperative treatments are effective for managing OSD. Surgery, while rare, seems reserved for patients with closed growth plates who have persistent symptoms. This review highlights the need for additional studies to better identify the best nonsurgical treatment.
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.