ArticleOrthopedic reviews2026
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Pain, Disability, Muscle Strength, and Functional Performance.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2026. 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
Background: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is widely used in the rehabilitation of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) to improve quadriceps activation and counteract arthrogenic muscle inhibition. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported inconsistent findings, and the overall clinical effectiveness of NMES across key patient outcomes remains uncertain. Objective: To evaluate the effects of NMES, administered alone or in combination with exercise, on pain, self-reported disability, quadriceps muscle strength, and functional performance in adults with KOA, and to explore whether treatment effects differ according to comparator intervention. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was conducted according to PRISMA 2020. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to April 20, 2026. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using restricted maximum likelihood estimation. Prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses were undertaken, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Results: Eight unique RCTs (10 publications) were included. Overall, NMES did not significantly improve pain, self-reported disability, quadriceps strength, or six-minute walk distance compared with pooled comparator interventions. A significant improvement was observed for Timed Up and Go performance, although this estimate was largely driven by a single trial. Prespecified subgroup analyses demonstrated that treatment effects differed according to comparator intervention. NMES combined with exercise resulted in greater pain reduction than exercise alone, whereas no consistent advantage was observed when NMES was compared with alternative conservative interventions. Most trials were judged to have low risk of bias or some concerns. Conclusions: NMES does not appear to provide consistent clinical benefits across all rehabilitation settings for KOA. Rather, its effectiveness depends on the therapeutic context in which it is delivered, with the greatest benefit observed when used as an adjunct to structured exercise rather than as a stand-alone intervention. Larger, methodologically rigorous RCTs using standardized stimulation protocols are required to define the patients most likely to benefit.
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.