↓ 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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 128 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 13%
Other 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Master 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 34 27%
Unknown 30 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Engineering 5 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 37 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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
#1,697,553
of 21,696,576 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#346
of 3,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,432
of 443,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#36
of 320 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,696,576 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 3,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 443,796 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 320 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.