To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.


Already Have an Account?

Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Knee OA 12
Treatments and Voting 12
Network Meta-Analysis Results

Welcome to OE Recommends

OrthoEvidence Recommends provides evidence to inform recommendations for the care of patients with orthopaedic or musculoskeletal conditions, with the aim of improving the quality of health care. We utilize rigorous and transparent approaches to review, evaluate and summarize research studies for making practice recommendations. Select one of our currently available topics below!

Please note: The data within the OE Recommends system was last updated in October 2019

Physicians, surgeons, researchers, allied healthcare professionals, or any other relevant stakeholders who treat patients with these conditions or are involved with creating policy regarding these health issues.

Within each OE Recommends topic, we offer background information on the topic, details regarding the treatments evaluated, results from our meta-analyses, results from the voting conducted by our panel members, and the ability for you to vote as well!

Voting results are displayed as the percentage of panel members who recommend the particular treatment for the health condition of interest, with results shown within different contexts, such as varying levels of disease severity or time frames of symptomatic relief, where applicable.

In addition, we asked our panelists to disclose their conflicts of interest related to any of the treatments that they voted on, allowing us to show voting results by all panelists, as well as segmented by conflicted panelists and non-conflicted panelists.

Want to see more details on our methods?

Knee Osteoarthritis



Treatments and Voting



Meta-Analysis Results



What it means
Very Low
The true effect is probably markedly different from the estimated effect.
The true effect might be markedly different from the estimated effect.
The authors believe that the true effect is probably close to the estimated effect.
The authors have a lot of confidence that the true effect is similiar to the estimated effect.


The minimal important difference (MID) is the smallest difference in an outcome that patients consider meaningful; this estimate was obtained from a systematic review of MIDs for each individual outcome of pain, function, and stiffness.


The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) is a numeric presentation of the overall ranking and presents a single number associated with each treatment. SUCRA values range from 0 to 100%. The higher the SUCRA value, and the closer to 100%, the higher the likelihood that a therapy is in the top rank or one of the top ranks; the closer to 0 the SUCRA value, the more likely that a therapy is in the bottom rank, or one of the bottom ranks.