PTOTMeta-AnalysisJournal of rehabilitation medicine2021

Effects of orthopedic insoles on patients with knee osteoarthritis: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Long Yu, Yanmin Wang, Jianzhong Yang and 2 others

PMID 33904586

WHAT IT FOUND

Orthopedic insoles did not significantly reduce pain or improve function in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

While one analysis showed a small WOMAC pain difference, sensitivity checks removed this effect. Clinicians should not expect these insoles to change symptoms or mobility for this population.

Key findings

01Pooled analysis showed no significant difference in pain scores between insole and control groups.

02Sensitivity analysis removing heterogeneity showed no significant difference in WOMAC pain scores.

03There were no significant differences in stiffness, function, Lequesne index, or femorotibial angle.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The included studies had highly variable results, and removing just one or two studies changed the conclusions, suggesting the findings are unstable. Most studies did not match participants by age or sex, and few reported the severity or duration of the osteoarthritis, which may have hidden effects in specific subgroups. The studies did not report how long patients actually wore the insoles, so it is unclear if non-adoption contributed to the lack of effect. The search was limited to English and Chinese publications, which may have missed relevant trials.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret the initial significant p-value for WOMAC pain as evidence of benefit. This result disappeared when the authors performed a sensitivity analysis to account for high heterogeneity, indicating the effect was likely an artifact of study variability rather than a true clinical improvement.

Read it on PubMed →