↓ Skip to main content

The efficacy of multiple versus single hyaluronic acid injections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The efficacy of multiple versus single hyaluronic acid injections: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1897-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Concoff, Parag Sancheti, Faizan Niazi, Peter Shaw, Jeffrey Rosen

Abstract

Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) is a common therapy used to treat knee pain and suppress knee inflammation in knee osteoarthritis (OA), typically prescribed in regimens ranging from a single injection to 5 weekly injections given once weekly. We conducted a systematic review to determine the efficacy of IA-HA, with subgroup analyses to explore the differences in knee pain and adverse events (AEs) across different dosing regimens. We conducted a systematic search of the literature to identify studies evaluating IA-HA for the management of knee OA compared to IA-saline. Primary outcome measure was the mean knee pain score at 13 Weeks (3 months) or 26 weeks (6 months). Secondary outcome was the number of treatment-related AEs and treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs). We evaluated differences in levels of pain and AEs/SAEs between dosing regimens compared to IA-Saline. Thirty articles were included. Overall, IA-HA injections were associated with less knee pain compared to IA-Saline injections for all dosing regimens. 2-4 injections of IA-HA vs. IA-Saline produced the largest effect size at both 3-months and 6-months (Standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.76; -0.98 to -0.53, 95% CI, P < 0.00001, and SMD = -0.36; -0.63 to -0.09 95% CI, P = 0.008, respectively). Additionally, single injection studies yielded a non-significant treatment effect at 3 and 6 months, while ≥5 5 injections demonstrated a significant improvement in pain only at 6 months. Five or more injections of IA-HA were associated with a higher risk of treatment-related AEs compared to IA-Saline (Risk ratio [RR] = 1.67; 1.09 to 2.56 95% CI, p = 0.02), which was a result not seen within the 1 and 2-4 injection subgroups. Overall, 2-4 and ≥5 injection regimens provided pain relief over IA-Saline, while single injection did not. Intra-articular injections of HA used in a 2-4 injection treatment regimen provided the greatest benefit when compared to IA-Saline with respect to pain improvement in patients with knee OA, and was generally deemed safe with few to no treatment-related AEs reported across studies. Future research is needed to directly compare these treatment regimens.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 14%
Other 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Master 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 34 24%
Unknown 38 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Engineering 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 45 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,769,456
of 24,460,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#337
of 4,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,679
of 449,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#10
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,460,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,285 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 449,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.