Efficacy and safety of ginger in osteoarthritis patients: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials.

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of oral ginger for symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) by carrying out a systematic literature search followed by meta-analyses on selected studies. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral ginger treatment with placebo in OA patients aged >18 years. Outcomes were reduction in pain and reduction in disability. Harm was assessed as withdrawals due to adverse events. The efficacy effect size was estimated using Hedges' standardized mean difference (SMD), and safety by risk ratio (RR). Standard random-effects meta-analysis was used, and inconsistency was evaluated by the I-squared index (I(2)). Out of 122 retrieved references, 117 were discarded, leaving five trials (593 patients) for meta-analyses. The majority reported relevant randomization procedures and blinding, but an inadequate intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Following ginger intake, a statistically significant pain reduction SMD = -0.30 ([95% CI: [(-0.50, -0.09)], P = 0.005]) with a low degree of inconsistency among trials (I(2) = 27%), and a statistically significant reduction in disability SMD = -0.22 ([95% CI: ([-0.39, -0.04)]; P = 0.01; I(2) = 0%]) were seen, both in favor of ginger. Patients given ginger were more than twice as likely to discontinue treatment compared to placebo ([RR = 2.33; 95% CI: (1.04, 5.22)]; P = 0.04; I(2) = 0%]). Ginger was modestly efficacious and reasonably safe for treatment of OA. We judged the evidence to be of moderate quality, based on the small number of participants and inadequate ITT populations. Prospero: CRD42011001777.

Effect of calcium from dairy and dietary supplements on faecal fat excretion: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Observational studies have found that dietary calcium intake is inversely related to body weight and body fat mass. One explanatory mechanism is that dietary calcium increases faecal fat excretion. To examine the effect of calcium from dietary supplements or dairy products on quantitative faecal fat excretion, we performed a systematic review with meta-analysis. We included randomized, controlled trials of calcium (supplements or dairy) in healthy subjects, where faecal fat excretion was measured. Meta-analyses used random-effects models with changes in faecal fat excreted expressed as standardized mean differences, as the studies assessed the same outcome but measured in different ways. An increased calcium intake resulted in increased excretion of faecal fat by a standardized mean difference of 0.99 (95% confidence intervals: 0.63-1.34; P < 0.0001; expected to correspond to approximately 2g day(-1)) with moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 49.5%) indicating some inconsistency in trial outcomes. However, the dairy trials showed homogeneous outcomes (I(2)=0%) indicating consistency among these trials. We estimated that increasing the dairy calcium intake by 1241 mg day(-1) resulted in an increase in faecal fat of 5.2 (1.6-8.8) g day(-1). In conclusion, dietary calcium has the potential to increase faecal fat excretion to an extent that could be relevant for prevention of weight (re-)gain. Long-term studies are required to establish its potential contribution.

Does the hip powder of Rosa canina (rosehip) reduce pain in osteoarthritis patients?--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)--of a hip powder of Rosa canina (rosehip) preparation for symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), in order to estimate the empirical efficacy as a pain reducing compound. METHOD: RCTs from systematic searches were included if they explicitly stated that OA patients were randomized to either rosehip or placebo. The primary outcome was reduction in pain calculated as effect size (ES), defined as the standardized mean difference (SMD). As secondary analysis the number of responders to therapy was analyzed as Odds Ratios (OR), and expressed as the Number Needed to Treat (NNT). Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML) methods were applied for the meta-analyses using mixed effects models. RESULTS: The three studies (287 patients and a median trial-duration of 3 months)--all supported by the manufacturer (Hyben-Vital International)--showed a reduction in pain scores by rosehip powder (145 patients) compared to placebo (142 patients): ES of 0.37 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.13-0.60], P=0.002. Test for homogeneity seemed to support that the efficacy was consistent across trials (I(2)=0%). Thus it seems reasonable to assume that the three studies were measuring the same overall effect. It seemed twice as likely that a patient allocated to rosehip powder would respond to therapy, compared to placebo (OR=2.19; P=0.0009); corresponding to a NNT of six (95% CI: 4-13) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although based on a sparse amount of data, the results of the present meta-analysis indicate that rosehip powder does reduce pain; accordingly it may be of interest as a nutraceutical, although its efficacy and safety need evaluation and independent replication in a future large-scale/long-term trial.

Symptomatic efficacy of avocado-soybean unsaponifiables (ASU) in osteoarthritis (OA) patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of preparations with avocado-soybean unsaponifiables (ASUs) in osteoarthritis (OA) patients using meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHOD: RCTs from systematic searches were included if they explicitly stated that hip and/or knee OA patients were randomized to either ASU or placebo. The co-primary outcome was reduction in pain and Lequesne index, leading to effect size (ES), calculated as the standardized mean difference. As secondary analysis, the number of responders to therapy was analyzed as odds ratios (ORs). Restricted maximum likelihood methods were applied for the meta-analyses, using mixed effects models. RESULTS: Four trials--all supported by the manufacturer--were included, with 664 OA patients with either hip (41.4%) or knee (58.6%) OA allocated to either 300 mg ASU (336) or placebo (328). Average trial duration was 6 months (range: 3-12 months). Though based on heterogeneous results, the combined pain reduction favored ASU (I(2) = 83.5%, ES = 0.39 [95% confidence intervals: 0.01-0.76], P=0.04). Applying the Lequesne index also favored ASU (I(2) = 61.0%, ES = 0.45 [0.21-0.70], P = 0.0003). Secondarily, the number of responders following ASU compared to placebo (OR = 2.19, P = 0.007) corresponded to a number needed to treat of six (4-21) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, patients may be recommended to give ASU a chance for e.g., 3 months. Meta-analysis data support better chances of success in patients with knee OA than in those with hip OA.

Aquatic exercise for the treatment of knee and hip osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Clinical experience indicates that aquatic exercise may have advantages for osteoarthritis patients. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and safety of aquatic-exercise interventions in the treatment of knee and hip osteoarthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE from 1949, EMBASE from 1980, CENTRAL (Issue 2, 2006), CINAHL from 1982, Web of Science from 1945, all up to May 2006. There was no language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised clinical trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed the internal validity of included trials and extracted data. Pooled results were analyzed using standardized mean differences (SMD). MAIN RESULTS: There is a lack of high-quality studies in this area. In total, six trials (800 participants) were included. At the end of treatment for combined knee and hip osteoarthritis, there was a small-to-moderate effect on function (SMD 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 0.42) and a small-to-moderate effect on quality of life (SMD 0.32, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.61). A minor effect of a 3% absolute reduction (0.6 fewer points on a 0 to 20 scale) and 6.6% relative reduction from baseline was found for pain. There was no evidence of effect on walking ability or stiffness immediately after end of treatment. No evidence of effect on pain, function or quality of life were observed on the one trial including participants with hip osteoarthritis alone. Only one trial was identified including knee osteoarthritis alone, comparing aquatic exercise with land-based exercise. Immediately after treatment, there was a large effect on pain (SMD 0.86, 95%CI 0.25 to 1.47; 22% relative percent improvement), but no evidence of effect on stiffness or walking ability. Only two studies reported adverse effects, that is, the interventions did not increase self-reported pain or symptom scores. No radiographic evaluation was performed in any of the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Aquatic exercise appears to have some beneficial short-term effects for patients with hip and/or knee OA while no long-term effects have been documented. Based on this, one may consider using aquatic exercise as the first part of a longer exercise programme for osteoarthritis patients. The controlled and randomised studies in this area are still too few to give further recommendations on how to apply the therapy, and studies of clearly defined patient groups with long-term outcomes are needed to decide on the further use of this therapy in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

[Pool exercise therapy of rheumatoid arthritis]. / Bassinterapi ved reumatoid artrit.

Aquatic therapy is a subgroup of balneotherapy and consists of exercises in a hot water pool. It uses the physical properties of water to achieve better mobility for patients whose pain, lack of muscle strength, and joint deformities are inhibiting factors when exercising on land. Pool therapy shows positive effects as part of the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis patients, but too few studies with an acceptable design and a well-defined patient group have been carried out. The documentation available on aquatic therapy indicates that more large clinical, controlled, and randomised studies must be conducted.