113
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Efficacy and safety of plant-derived products for the treatment of osteoarthritis

, &
Pages 1-20 | Published online: 16 Dec 2014

Figures & data

Table 1 Details of the herbal medicinal products used for the treatment of OA in randomized controlled double-blind studies

Table 2 Risk of bias assessment for individual randomized controlled trials of botanical therapy versus placebo or active comparator

Figure 1 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to placebo on VAS and NRS pain scores.

Note: Weights are from random effects analysis.
Abbreviations: n, number of study participants; SMD, standardized mean difference; CI, confidence interval; VAS, visual analog scale; NRS, numeric rating scale; AIF, anti-inflammatory factor; ASU, avocado/soybean unsaponifiables.
Figure 1 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to placebo on VAS and NRS pain scores.

Table 3 Summary of efficacy findings of plant-based therapy compared to placebo, by therapy class

Figure 2 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to placebo on pain WOMAC and KOOS pain scores.

Note: Weights are from random effects analysis.
Abbreviations: AIF, anti-inflammatory factor; n, number of study participants; SMD, standardized mean difference; CI, confidence interval; FNZG, Fufang Nanxing Zhitong Gao; SJG, Shangshi Jietong Gao; AIF, anti-inflammatory factor; WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; KOOS, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; TCM, traditional Chinese medicine.
Figure 2 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to placebo on pain WOMAC and KOOS pain scores.

Figure 3 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to active comparator on VAS and NRS pain scores.

Note: Weights are from random effects analysis.
Abbreviations: ASU, avocado/soybean unsaponifiables; n, number of study participants; SMD, standardized mean differences; CI, confidence interval; VAS, visual analog scale; NRS, numeric rating scale.
Figure 3 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to active comparator on VAS and NRS pain scores.

Figure 4 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to active comparator on WOMAC and KOOS pain scores.

Note: Weights are from random effects analysis.
Abbreviations: ASU, avocado/soybean unsaponifiables; n, number of study participants; SMD, standardized mean differences; CI, confidence interval; WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; KOOS, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score.
Figure 4 Efficacy of plant-derived therapies compared to active comparator on WOMAC and KOOS pain scores.

Figure 5 Safety of plant-derived therapies compared to placebo: incidence of one or more adverse events.

Abbreviations: n, number of study participants; FNZG, Fufang Nanxing Zhitong Gao; SJG, Shangshi Jietong Gao; RR, relative risk; CI, confidence interval; AIF, anti-inflammatory factor; TCM, traditional Chinese medicine; M-H, effect size for the risk ratio using a fixed effect model using the method of Mantel and Haenszel; D+L, effect size for the risk ratio using a random effects model using the method of DerSimonian and Laird.
Figure 5 Safety of plant-derived therapies compared to placebo: incidence of one or more adverse events.

Figure 6 Safety of botanical therapy compared to active comparator: incidence of one or more adverse events.

Abbreviations: n, number of study participants; RR, relative risk; CI, confidence interval; ASU, avocado/soybean unsaponifiables; TCM, traditional Chinese medicine.
Figure 6 Safety of botanical therapy compared to active comparator: incidence of one or more adverse events.