ABSTRACT
Introduction Knee osteoarthritis is a chronic degenerative disease and the most common form of osteoarthritis, and is associated with significant chronic pain, disability and impairment of quality of life. Currently, there is no cure for knee osteoarthritis and pain management and improving quality of life are the main therapeutic goals. The objective of this study is to evaluate the relative efficacy and acceptability of currently available interventions using network meta-analysis in order to provide a comprehensive evidence base to guide future clinical treatment guidelines.
Methods and analysis A comprehensive literature search of major electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and clinical trial registries will be undertaken to identify randomised control trials (RCTs) of interventions listed in NICE guidelines for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in adults. We will perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) to estimate relative intervention effects across the whole treatment network. If any studies use multicomponent interventions, we will employ a component network meta-analysis (CNMA) model to estimate the contribution of individual components. The quality of evidence will be assessed using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) approach, which is based on the traditional GRADE framework adapted for NMA. Risk of bias will be assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) tool for RCTs.
Ethics and dissemination This study does not require ethical approval. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.
PROSPERO registration number CRD42020184192.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This will be the first network meta-analysis to assess relative effectiveness of interventions listed in NICE guidelines for pain management in knee osteoarthritis
The study will provide an evidence base to inform future clinical guidelines and treatment decision making
If relevant data are available, we will estimate the contribution of individual components in multicomponent interventions
Quality of evidence underlying all treatments will be assessed
Not all treatments will be evaluated if data are limited or we deem that network meta-analysis assumptions are violated
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by a Vice-Chancellor Scholarship fund (vcs-eh-03-19) from the University of Greenwich. OE was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 180083).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
n/a (protocol for a meta-analysis)
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵1 Joint first authors
t.thompson{at}gre.ac.uk
b.a.ahmed{at}gre.ac.uk
s.m.weldon{at}gre.ac.uk
oremiou{at}gmail.com
brendon.stubbs{at}kcl.ac.uk
Data Availability
n/a (study protocol)
