
==== Front
BMC Musculoskelet Disord
BMC Musculoskelet Disord
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
1471-2474
BioMed Central London

7805
10.1186/s12891-024-07805-3
Systematic Review
Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on pain and physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Wu Yan-lin 12
Luo Yun 2
Yang Jia-ming 12
Wu Yong-qiang 12
Zhu Qiang 2
Li Yi 2
Hu Hao 12
Zhang Jia-hong 2
Zhong Yan-biao 2
Wang Mao-yuan wmy.gmu.kf@gmail.com

23
1 https://ror.org/01tjgw469 grid.440714.2 0000 0004 1797 9454 Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province 341000 China
2 https://ror.org/040gnq226 grid.452437.3 Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province 341000 China
3 https://ror.org/040gnq226 grid.452437.3 Ganzhou Key Laboratory of Rehabilitation Medicine, First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province 341000 China
3 9 2024
3 9 2024
2024
25 70327 1 2024
21 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Background

Keen Osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common chronic disabling disease characterized by joint pain and dysfunction, which seriously affects patients’ quality of life. Recent studies have shown that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was a promising treatment for KOA.

Purpose

Investigate the effects of tDCS on pain and physical function in patients with KOA.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials related to tDCS and KOA were systematically searched in the PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, CINHL, and Web of Science databases from inception to July 23, 2024. The pain intensity was evaluated using the visual analog scale or the numeric rating scale, and the pain sensitivity was assessed using conditioned pain modulation, pressure pain threshold, heat pain threshold, or heat pain tolerance. The physical function outcome was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index or the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.

Results

Seven studies with a total of 503 participants were included. Compared to sham tDCS, tDCS was effective in reducing the short-term pain intensity (SMD: -0.58; 95% CI: -1.02, -0.14; p = 0.01) and pain sensitivity (SMD: -0.43; 95% CI: -0.70, -0.16; p = 0.002) but failed to significantly improve the long-term pain intensity (SMD: -0.26; 95% CI: -0.59, 0.08; p = 0.13) in KOA patients. In addition, tDCS did not significantly improve the short-term (SMD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.35, 0.08; p = 0.22) and long-term (SMD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.22, 0.25; p = 0.90) physical function in patients with KOA.

Conclusions

The tDCS can reduce short-term pain intensity and sensitivity but fails to significantly relieve long-term pain intensity and improve the physical function in patients with KOA. Thus, tDCS may be a potential therapeutic tool to reduce short-term pain intensity and pain sensitivity in patients with KOA.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-024-07805-3.

Keywords

Transcranial direct current stimulation
Knee osteoarthritis
Pain
Physical function
National Natural Science Foundation of China82060420 Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province, China20212BAB206004 Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education for the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Diseases,Gannan Medical UniversityNX202022 issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Osteoarthritis is a chronic, disabling disease of multiple etiologies, occurring primarily in joints with high loads and activities; the knee is the most complex and loaded joint in the body and, therefore, most prone to OA [1]. Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common chronic disabling disease in the middle-aged and elderly population and has become the fourth leading cause of disability worldwide [2, 3]. The pathogenesis of KOA is complex and involves multiple factors, such as mechanical stress, inflammation, metabolism, immunity, and genetics, with age, genetics, body weight, gender, and race as risk factors [4, 5]. KOA is characterized by joint pain, stiffness, swelling, and limited joint function due to structural and functional failure of the synovial joint [6]. In particular, the joint pain and dysfunction caused by KOA can significantly impact the quality of life in severe cases [7, 8]. Currently, a variety of treatments have been applied to the treatment of KOA, including oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), weight loss, exercise, modification of daily living abilities, orthotics, physical therapy, and intra-articular injections for the early stage of patients and surgical intervention for the advanced stage of patients [9, 10]. However, the therapeutic effect is limited, and there is a need for more effective treatments for KOA [11–14].

Recent studies have shown that pain-related brain mechanisms are altered in patients with KOA pain and that altered central pain processing is an essential driver of joint pain and dysfunction in patients with KOA [15–18]. Therefore, non-pharmacological interventions targeting central nervous system pain processing are increasingly attractive. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation procedure that has demonstrated efficacy in treating chronic pain by altering the cortical excitability of brain tissue [19–25]. However, the therapeutic effect of tDCS for KOA remains unclear. For example, Chang et al. concluded that tDCS was effective in relieving pain and improving physical function in patients with KOA [27]. However, the study by Azizi et al. found that tDCS was not effective in improving pain and physical function in KOA patients compared to the control group [26].

Some clinical studies with small samples have investigated the effect of tDCS in patients with KOA, but their results were inconsistent [26–32]. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect of tDCS on pain and physical function in patients with KOA.

Methods

This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [33]. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42022355451.

Study selection

Two reviewers (JMY and YQW) independently assessed and selected the literature according to the predetermined inclusion criteria. In case of disagreement, a third reviewer (YBZ) would be consulted. The inclusion criteria for the study were based on the PICOS principle: (1) population (P): patients were diagnosed with KOA according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria; (2) intervention (I): the intervention of the experiment group was tDCS; (3) comparison (C): the intervention of the control group was sham tDCS; (4) outcome (O): the outcomes of the study included pain and physical function; (5) study design (S): the study type was restricted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Search strategies

The PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to July 23, 2024. Combined medical terms were searched as follows: (“Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation” OR “tDCS”) AND (“Osteoarthritis”) AND (“knee”) AND (“randomized controlled trial” OR “RCT”). The detailed search strategy is described in Appendix S1. In addition, we manually searched the references of the identified studies to ensure the inclusion of all relevant papers.

Quality assessment

The methodological quality of each included study was assessed by two reviewers (HH and JHZ) using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for risk of bias in the included studies [34]. In case of disagreement, a third reviewer (YBZ) was involved to reach a consensus. The following domains were assessed: (1) random sequence generation; (2) allocation concealment; (3) blinding of participants and personnel; (4) blinding of outcome assessment; (5) incomplete outcome data; (6) selective reporting; (7) other sources of bias. Each item was categorized as low risk, high risk, or unclear risk.

In addition, we assessed the quality of each piece of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) [35]. This system incorporates eight domains of risk of bias, directness of evidence, consistency and precision of results, publication bias, effect size, dose-response, and effect of confounding factors, rated as “high,” “moderate,” “low,” or “very low.”

Data extraction and meta-analysis

Data were independently screened and extracted by two reviewers (QZ and YL) using a standardized form. Data extraction included: (1) the name of the first author and the country and region of the author; (2) the age and sex of the participants; (3) the sample size of the intervention and control groups; (4) the intensity and duration of the intervention and the mode of use in the control group; (5) the time point of outcome assessment; (6) the outcome indicators; (7) Mean and standard deviation (SD) of the differences in visual analog scale (VAS), numeric rating scale (NRS), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), pressure pain threshold (PPT), heat pain threshold (HPTh), heat pain tolerance (HPTo), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) between the control and intervention groups. If the mean and SD of the differences were not available, we instead extracted the mean and SD of the pre-intervention and post-intervention values for the control and intervention groups. If consensus could not be reached, a third reviewer (YBZ) acted as an arbiter.

The pain intensity of patients with KOA was assessed by the VAS or the NRS. The VAS score and the NRS score range from 0 to 10 or 100, with higher scores indicating more pain [36]. The pain sensitivity of patients with KOA was assessed by CPM, PPT, HPTh, or HPTo. A multimodal Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) battery was administered for experimental pain sensitivity [37]. Thermal stimulation was performed using the limit rise method to measure the HPTh and HPTo in the knee. Starting from a baseline of 32 °C, the thermode temperature was increased at a rate of 0.5 °C per second until the participant pressed a button to stop the thermal stimulation. Participants were asked to press a button to assess HPTh when they felt “the first pain” and to press a button to assess HPTo when they “no longer felt able to tolerate the pain.” The average of three trials was calculated to determine HPTo and HPTh. Knee PPT was then measured using blunt mechanical pressure delivered by a digital manometer. The pressure was continuously increased (at a rate of 0.3 kgf/cm2/s) while asking participants to notify the experimenter when they felt “the first time they became in pain” to assess PPT. After immersing the contralateral hand in a cold water bath at 12 °C for 1 min, CPM was assessed by determining the change in trapezius PPT. The physical function of patients with KOA was evaluated by the WOMAC or the KOOS. The WOMAC consists of three subscales related to pain during activity (range 0–20), stiffness during the day (range 0–8), and impairment of physical function (range 0–68), with higher scores indicating more pain, stiffness, and impairment of physical function severity. These scales have been widely used in clinical pain studies, and psychometric properties have been demonstrated [38–40]. The KOOS score consists of five sections, with a minimum answer score of 0 and a maximum score of 4 for each question. The scores for each section are calculated individually and then converted to a percentage score using a conversion formula, where a score of 0 means that the part of the joint is functioning very poorly, and a score of 100 means that the part of the joint is functioning perfectly well [41].

We counted data from two assessment time points: the end of the intervention and the end of the follow-up. Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4 software was used for statistical analysis. The mean and SD of the differences and the sample size were entered into the statistical software. If the difference could not be obtained directly, the mean change was calculated by subtracting the final mean from the baseline mean. According to Cochrane’s recommendations, the SD of the baseline change was calculated using a correlation coefficient (r) estimated at 0.7, and the SD of the baseline and final means for each group was calculated using Equation 1[42]. If 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were provided in the article, SD was calculated according to the Equation 2, where N represents the sample size; if the sample size of each group is small (≤ 60), then 3.92 needs to be replaced with 2 x t-value, t-value can be obtained by consulting the table of t-boundary values.

1 \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\begin{aligned}&{\text{S}\text{D}}_{\text{c}\text{h}\text{a}\text{n}\text{g}\text{e}}\cr&\quad=\sqrt{{\left(\text{S}\text{D}\:\text{b}\text{a}\text{s}\text{e}\text{l}\text{i}\text{n}\text{e}\right)}^{2}+{\left(\text{S}\text{D}\:\text{f}\text{i}\text{n}\text{a}\text{l}\right)}^{2}-2\times\:\text{r}\times\:\text{S}\text{D}\:\text{b}\text{a}\text{s}\text{e}\text{l}\text{i}\text{n}\text{e}\times\:\text{S}\text{D}\:\text{f}\text{i}\text{n}\text{a}\text{l}}\end{aligned}$$\end{document}

2 \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\:\text{S}\text{D}=\sqrt{\text{N}}\times\:\left(\text{U}\text{p}\text{p}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{b}\text{o}\text{u}\text{n}\text{d}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{t}\text{h}\text{e}\:\text{C}\text{I}-\text{l}\text{o}\text{w}\text{e}\text{r}\:\text{b}\text{o}\text{u}\text{n}\text{d}\:\text{o}\text{f}\:\text{t}\text{h}\text{e}\:\text{C}\text{I}\right)/3.92$$\end{document}

In this meta-analysis, we used mean differences (MD) and 95% CI to report effect sizes for studies using the same measure and standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% CI for those continuous outcomes that measured the same outcome using different units. Heterogeneity was tested using the I2 statistic. As they were heterogeneous in terms of duration of interventions, time points of assessment, and risk of bias between studies, a random-effects model was used for meta-analysis [43].

Results

Study selection

After a systematic search of the 6 databases, we found 220 articles, including 49 in PubMed, 49 in Embase, 37 in Web of Science, 33 in Medline, 12 in CINAHL, and 40 in the Cochrane Library database. Seven studies were finally included after a series of screenings. The detailed selection process of these trials is shown in Fig. 1. Detailed reasons for exclusion and references to excluded studies can be found in Appendix S2.

Fig. 1 Flow chart of study selection

Study characteristics

The characteristics of the 7 included RCTs were shown in Table 1. A total of 503 participants were included, with sample sizes ranging from 25 to 120. Most of the included studies included patients older than 50, and only one study included those under 50 [26]. The main intervention parameters of tDCS were shown in Table 2. The active tDCS was performed using a pair of saline-saturated sponge electrodes placed on the skin. The anodal electrode was placed on C3 or C4 (10–20 systems of electroencephalography electrode placement) contralateral to the affected knee, and the cathodal electrode was placed on the supraorbital area (SO) contralateral to the anode. The active tDCS was used for active stimulation using a constant current intensity of 2 mA for 20 min per day. In contrast, for the sham tDCS, the electrode position was the same as for active tDCS, the stimulator provided only 2 mA of current, and the stimulation lasted 30 s in six studies and only 15 s in another study [27]. In all seven studies, the duration of the interventions was not identical, with three studies having a duration of 1 week and several interventions of 5 times a week [26, 30, 32], three studies having a duration of 3 weeks and several interventions of 5 times a week [28, 29, 31], and one study having a duration of 8 weeks and several interventions of 2 times a week [27]. Of all included studies, three studies used the VAS to assess pain intensity [26, 27, 29], and three studies used the NRS to assess pain intensity [28–30]. Two studies used CPM, PPT, HPTh, and HPTo to evaluate pain sensitivity [31, 32], and one study used CPM and PPT to assess pain sensitivity [29]. Four studies used WOMAC to evaluate physical function [27–30], and one study used KOOS to assess physical function [26].

Table 1 Characteristics of the studies included in the review

Study	Country	Age	Sex(M/F)	Intervention	Control group	Outcomes	Time points of assessment		
Azizi

et al. 2021 [26]

	Iran	30–70	18/36	tDCS

(n = 27)

	sham tDCS

(n = 27)

	KOOS, VAS	Baseline, Week 1, Month 3		
Chang

et al. 2017 [26]

	China	>50	8/17	tDCS + exercise

(n = 13)

	sham tDCS + exercise(n = 12)	VAS, WOMAC	Baseline, Week 8		
Martorella

et al. 2022 [28]

	American	50–80	38/82	tDCS

(n = 60)

	sham tDCS

(n = 60)

	NRS, WOMAC	Baseline, Week 3, Month 3		
Regina

et al. 2021 [29]

	Brazil	>60	16/88	tDCS

(n = 51)

	sham tDCS

(n = 53)

	VAS, NRS, WOMAC, PPT, CPM	Baseline, Week 3, Month 2		
Ahn

et al. 2017 [30]

	American	50–70	19/21	tDCS

(n = 20)

	sham tDCS

(n = 20)

	NRS, WOMAC	Baseline, Days 1 ~ 5, Week 1

Week 2, Week 3

		
Martorella

et al. 2022 [31]

	American	50–85	38/82	tDCS

(n = 60)

	sham tDCS

(n = 60)

	HPTh, HPTo, PPT, CPM	Baseline, Week 3		
Ahn

et al. 2018 [32]

	American	50–70	19/21	tDCS

(n = 20)

	sham tDCS

(n = 20)

	HPTh, HPTo, PPT, CPM	Baseline, Week 1		
Notes M: man; F: Female; tDCS: transcranial direct current stimulation; KOOS: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; VAS: visual analog scale; NRS: numeric rating scale; WOMAC: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; PPT: pressure pain threshold; CPM: conditioned pain modulation; HPTh: heat pain threshold; HPTo: heat pain tolerance

Table 2 Main intervention parameters of tDCS

Study	Stimulation site
(anodal electrode)	Stimulation site
(cathodal electrode)	Intensity of stimulation (m A)	Duration of stimulation (min)	Duration of intervention	Stimulation
of sham tDCS	
Azizi

et al. 2021 [26]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	5 times per week for 1 week	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 30 s	
Chang

et al. 2017 [27]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	2 times per week for 8 weeks	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 15 s	
Martorella

et al. 2022 [28]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	5 times per week for 3 weeks	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 30 s	
Regina

et al. 2021 [29]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	5 times per week for 3 weeks	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 30 s	
Ahn

et al. 2017 [30]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	5 times per week for 1 week	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 30 s	
Martorella

et al. 2022 [31]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	5 times per week for 3 weeks	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 30 s	
Ahn

et al. 2018 [32]

	C3 or C4	SO contralateral

to the anode

	2	20	5 times per week for 1week	2 mA of current and the stimulation lasted 30 s	
Note SO: supraorbital area

Quality of included studies

The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane tool for seven studies, as shown in Fig. 2. One study did not use allocation concealment (high risk of bias) [26]. Two studies did not mention allocation concealment (unclear risk of bias) [28, 31]. Five studies did not mention blinding of outcome assessment (unclear risk of bias) [26, 28, 30–32]. One study had incomplete outcome data because the follow-up rate was less than 85% (high risk of bias) [27]. One study used tDCS intervention and exercise therapy, which may have impacted the outcome and led to a risk of bias (high risk of bias) [27]. No studies had selection bias or reporting bias.

Fig. 2 Risk of bias graph and summary of included studies. (A) The risk of bias graph shows the overall risk of bias in each domain. (B) The risk of bias summary indicates the risk of bias in each domain for each study

Quality of outcome indicators

We used the GRADE level of evidence to assess the critical outcome indicators of the included studies. We found a high risk of bias for the outcome indicator used to assess pain intensity and physical function, allowing a risk of bias rating of severe. The outcome indicator used to assess KOA physical function involved a small sample size (n < 400), enabling imprecise risk ratings of severe. No serious risk was identified for the remaining items, so the final rating for the indicator used to assess pain intensity was moderate, the final rating for the indicator used to evaluate pain sensitivity was high, and the final rating for the indicator used to assess physical function was low, as detailed in Table 3.

Table 3 GRADE evidence profile for outcomes among trials included in the systematic review

Outcomes	Number of studies	Design	Risk of bias	Inconsistency	Indirectness	Imprecision	Publication
bias	Absolute
effect	GRADE
quality	Symbolic
expression	
Short-term pain intensity:

(VAS or NRS)

	5	RCT	-1#	0	0	0	0	SMD 0.58 lower (1.02 to 0.14 lower)	Moderate	⨁⨁⨁⊖	
Long-term pain intensity:

(VAS or NRS)

	4	RCT	-1#	0	0	0	0	SMD 0.26 lower (0.59 lower to 0.08 higher)	Moderate	⨁⨁⨁⊖	
Pain sensitivity: (CPM, PPT, HPTh, or HPTo)	3	RCT	0	0	0	0	0	SMD 0.43 lower (0.7 to 0.16 lower)	High	⨁⨁⨁⨁	
Short-term physical function: (WOMAC or KOOS)	5	RCT	-1#	0	0	-1*	0	SMD 0.13 lower (0.35 lower to 0.08 higher)	Low	⨁⨁⊖⊖	
Long-term physical function: (WOMAC or KOOS)	3	RCT	-1#	0	0	-1*	0	SMD 0.02 higher (0.22 lower to 0.25 higher)	Low	⨁⨁⊖⊖	
Notes VAS: visual analog scale; NRS: numeric rating scale; CPM: conditioned pain modulation; PPT: pressure pain threshold; HPTh: heat pain threshold; HPTo: heat pain tolerance; WOMAC: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; KOOS: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; RCT: randomized controlled trial; SMD: standardized mean differences; #Downgraded by levels due to a high risk of bias; *Downgraded by levels due to small sample size (n<400)

Effect of tDCS on pain intensity

Five studies assessed the effect of tDCS on short-term pain intensity in patients with KOA using the VAS score or the NRS score [26–30]. Meta-analysis (Fig. 3A) showed that tDCS was effective in reducing short-term pain intensity in patients with KOA (SMD: -0.58; 95% CI: -1.02, -0.14; p = 0.01). Four studies assessed the effect of tDCS on long-term pain intensity in patients with KOA using the VAS scores or the NRS scores. Meta-analysis (Fig. 3B) showed that tDCS did not significantly improve long-term pain intensity in patients with KOA (SMD: -0.26; 95% CI: -0.59, 0.08; p = 0.13).

Fig. 3 Forest plot of the effect of tDCS on pain intensity in patients with KOA. (A) The effect of tDCS on short-term pain intensity. (B) The effect of tDCS on long-term pain intensity. NRS: numeric rating scale; VAS: visual analog scale

Effect of tDCS on pain sensitivity

Three studies assessed the effect of tDCS on short-term pain sensitivity in patients with KOA by CPM, PPT, HPTh, or HPTo [29, 31, 32]. Meta-analysis (Fig. 4) showed that tDCS was effective in reducing short-term pain sensitivity in patients with KOA compared with the control group (SMD: -0.43; 95% CI: -0.70, -0.16; p = 0.002). Only one study evaluated the effect of tDCS on long-term pain sensitivity in patients with KOA, and the results of this study showed that tDCS failed to improve long-term pain sensitivity in patients with KOA [29].

Fig. 4 Forest plot of the effect of tDCS on short-term pain sensitivity in patients with KOA. CPM: conditioned pain modulation; HPTh: heat pain threshold; HPTo: heat pain tolerance; PPT: pressure pain threshold

Effect of tDCS on physical function

Five studies assessed the effects of tDCS on short-term physical function in patients with KOA through WOMAC or KOOS [26–30]. Meta-analysis (Fig. 5A) showed that tDCS did not significantly improve short-term physical function in patients with KOA (SMD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.35, 0.08; p = 0.22). Three studies evaluated the effects of tDCS on long-term physical function in patients with KOA via WOMAC or KOOS [26. 28–29]. Meta-analysis (Fig. 5B) showed that tDCS did not significantly improve long-term physical function in patients with KOA (SMD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.22, 0.25; p = 0.90).

Fig. 5 Forest plot of the effect of tDCS on physical function in patients with KOA. (A) The effect of tDCS on short-term physical function. (B) The effect of tDCS on long-term physical function

Discussion

Pain is the predominant symptom of patients with KOA, and severe joint pain can affect the quality of life [44, 45]. Previous studies thought that the pain of KOA patients is caused by regional peripheral afferents injury [46]. However, recent studies have found that central nociceptive sensitization plays a crucial role in KOA, leading to local and widespread nociceptive hyperalgesia in these patients [47–49]. tDCS is a non-invasive neuromodulator acting on the central nervous system and can alter neuronal excitability [50–52]. Therefore, tDCS may improve endogenous central pain inhibition in elderly KOA patients by attenuating the effects of central sensitization and modulating brain activity that processes pain, resulting in pain relief [53]. Also, it interacts with various neurotransmitters associated with pain processing, such as dopamine, 5-hydroxytryptamine, acetylcholine, and g-aminobutyric acid [54–58]. In addition, several studies have suggested that inhibition of thalamic sensory neurons and de-inhibition of periaqueductal grey matter neurons may be responsible for pain relief [59]. The results of our meta-analysis showed that tDCS was effective in relieving short-term pain intensity and pain sensitivity in patients with KOA but failed to significantly improve long-term pain intensity in patients. This may be due to the following reasons: Firstly, it may be that tDCS was used alone rather than in combination with another treatment; most of the included studies used tDCS only as an intervention; only the study by Chang et al. combined exercise therapy, but it did not evaluate the long-term effects of tDCS [27]. Secondly, the number of tDCS interventions in most studies may be too low, resulting in tDCS being able to modulate pain control in the short term, but its therapeutic effects are not maintained. Therefore, future studies on tDCS in combination with other therapies are needed, as well as more studies to determine the optimal duration and number of tDCS treatments to achieve maintenance of the treatment effect.

KOA patients often suffer from recurrent disease, so their physical functions are usually affected [60, 61]. Our findings suggest that tDCS did not significantly improve physical function in patients with KOA. The lack of statistical significance for physical function may be due to three reasons: Firstly, most of the included studies had a low number of interventions, Chang and colleagues conducted a 16-session tDCS intervention and found that tDCS improved overall physical function (as assessed by WOMAC) in patients with KOA [27]. Secondly, tDCS intervention alone may not improve physical function in patients with KOA, but one study that combined tDCS intervention with exercise therapy showed that tDCS improved physical function in patients with KOA [27]. Finally, the WOMAC includes pain, stiffness, and joint function. However, we only analyzed the total scores of the WOMAC because only one study examined all three aspects [30]. Therefore, tDCS with an increased number of interventions or in combination with other interventions (e.g., exercise therapy) may be able to improve patients’ physical function.

In addition, there are some limitations to this study. Firstly, the number and sample sizes of studies included in this analysis were minimal, which may impact the accuracy of the results. Secondly, the high degree of heterogeneity between studies reduces the quality of that evidence, making comparability of studies difficult. Thirdly, because only one study evaluated the long-term effects of tDCS on pain sensitivity in patients with KOA [29], we could not assess the long-term effects of tDCS on pain sensitivity in patients with KOA. Finally, because the intervention sites, intervention parameters, and duration of tDCS were essentially the same in the included studies, we were unable to explore the effects of tDCS on patients with KOA with different intervention sites, intervention parameters, and duration of intervention.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that tDCS can reduce short-term pain intensity and sensitivity but fails to significantly relieve long-term pain intensity and improve the physical function in patients with KOA. Thus, tDCS may be a potential therapeutic tool to reduce short-term pain intensity and pain sensitivity in patients with KOA. In addition, we found that combining tDCS with other therapies (e.g., exercise therapy) or increasing the number of interventions may improve physical function in patients with KOA. Future studies will require larger sample sizes, longer follow-up times, longer durations of tDCS treatment, and studies of different stimulation sites to determine the optimal tDCS dose and parameters for patients with KOA.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Appendix S1

Appendix S2

Abbreviations

KOA Knee osteoarthritis

tDCS Transcranial direct current stimulation

RCT Randomized controlled trial

GARDE Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation

SD Standard deviation

VAS Visual analog scale

NRS Numeric rating scale

CPM Conditioned pain modulation

PPT Pressure pain threshold

HPTh Heat pain threshold

HPTo Heat pain tolerance

QST Quantitative Sensory Testing

WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index

KOOS Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score

95% CI 95% confidence intervals

MD Mean differences

SMD Standardized mean differences

SO Supraorbital area

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Author contributions

Yanlin Wu collected the data and wrote the manuscript. Yun Luo supervised this study and revised the manuscript. Jiaming Yang and Yongqiang Wu selected the literature. Qiang Zhu and Yi Li extracted the data. Hao Hu and Jiahong Zhang assessed the quality of each included study. Yanbiao Zhong solved the difference. Maoyuan Wang provided the idea and designed this study.

Funding

Mao-yuan Wang is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82060420); the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province, China (20212BAB206004); Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education for the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Diseases, Gannan Medical University (NX202022).

Data availability

Data are available on reasonable request to the corresponding author at: wmy.gmu.kf@gmail.com.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Yanlin Wu and Yun Luo are the co-first authors of this work.
==== Refs
References

1. Prieto-Alhambra D Judge A Javaid MK Cooper C Diez-Perez A Arden NK Incidence and risk factors for clinically diagnosed knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis: influences of age, gender and osteoarthritis affecting other joints Ann Rheum Dis 2014 73 9 1659 64 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203355 23744977
Prieto-Alhambra D, Judge A, Javaid MK, Cooper C, Diez-Perez A, Arden NK. Incidence and risk factors for clinically diagnosed knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis: influences of age, gender and osteoarthritis affecting other joints. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(9):1659–64.23744977 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203355
2. Zhou M Wang H Zeng X Yin P Zhu J Chen W Li X Wang L Wang L Liu Y Mortality, morbidity, and risk factors in China and its provinces, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease Study 2017 Lancet 2019 394 10204 1145 58 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30427-1 31248666
Zhou M, Wang H, Zeng X, Yin P, Zhu J, Chen W, Li X, Wang L, Wang L, Liu Y, et al. Mortality, morbidity, and risk factors in China and its provinces, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2019;394(10204):1145–58.31248666 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30427-1
3. Zhang L Wen YL He CY Zeng Y Wang JQ Wang GY Relationship between classification of Fabellae and the severity of knee osteoarthritis: a relevant Study in the Chinese Population Orthop Surg 2022 14 2 274 9 10.1111/os.13006 34913250
Zhang L, Wen YL, He CY, Zeng Y, Wang JQ, Wang GY. Relationship between classification of Fabellae and the severity of knee osteoarthritis: a relevant Study in the Chinese Population. Orthop Surg. 2022;14(2):274–9.34913250 10.1111/os.13006
4. Busija L Bridgett L Williams SR Osborne RH Buchbinder R March L Fransen M Osteoarthritis Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2010 24 6 757 68 10.1016/j.berh.2010.11.001 21665124
Busija L, Bridgett L, Williams SR, Osborne RH, Buchbinder R, March L, Fransen M. Osteoarthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010;24(6):757–68.21665124 10.1016/j.berh.2010.11.001
5. Felson DT Lawrence RC Dieppe PA Hirsch R Helmick CG Jordan JM Kington RS Lane NE Nevitt MC Zhang Y Osteoarthritis: new insights. Part 1: the disease and its risk factors Ann Intern Med 2000 133 8 635 46 10.7326/0003-4819-133-8-200010170-00016 11033593
Felson DT, Lawrence RC, Dieppe PA, Hirsch R, Helmick CG, Jordan JM, Kington RS, Lane NE, Nevitt MC, Zhang Y, et al. Osteoarthritis: new insights. Part 1: the disease and its risk factors. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133(8):635–46.11033593 10.7326/0003-4819-133-8-200010170-00016
6. Cherian JJ, Jauregui JJ, Leichliter AK, Elmallah RK, Bhave A, Mont MA. The effects of various physical non-operative modalities on the pain in osteoarthritis of the knee. Bone Joint J 2016, 98–b(1 Suppl A):89–94.
7. Kolasinski SL Neogi T Hochberg MC Oatis C Guyatt G Block J Callahan L Copenhaver C Dodge C Felson D 2019 American College of Rheumatology/Arthritis Foundation Guideline for the Management of Osteoarthritis of the Hand, hip, and Knee Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2020 72 2 149 62 10.1002/acr.24131 31908149
Kolasinski SL, Neogi T, Hochberg MC, Oatis C, Guyatt G, Block J, Callahan L, Copenhaver C, Dodge C, Felson D, et al. 2019 American College of Rheumatology/Arthritis Foundation Guideline for the Management of Osteoarthritis of the Hand, hip, and Knee. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2020;72(2):149–62.31908149 10.1002/acr.24131
8. Liu Q Niu J Li H Ke Y Li R Zhang Y Lin J Knee symptomatic osteoarthritis, walking disability, NSAIDs use and all-cause Mortality: Population-based Wuchuan Osteoarthritis Study Sci Rep 2017 7 1 3309 10.1038/s41598-017-03110-3 28607349
Liu Q, Niu J, Li H, Ke Y, Li R, Zhang Y, Lin J. Knee symptomatic osteoarthritis, walking disability, NSAIDs use and all-cause Mortality: Population-based Wuchuan Osteoarthritis Study. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):3309.28607349 10.1038/s41598-017-03110-3
9. Roos EM Arden NK Strategies for the prevention of knee osteoarthritis Nat Rev Rheumatol 2016 12 2 92 101 10.1038/nrrheum.2015.135 26439406
Roos EM, Arden NK. Strategies for the prevention of knee osteoarthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2016;12(2):92–101.26439406 10.1038/nrrheum.2015.135
10. Van Manen MD Nace J Mont MA Management of primary knee osteoarthritis and indications for total knee arthroplasty for general practitioners J Am Osteopath Assoc 2012 112 11 709 15 23139341
Van Manen MD, Nace J, Mont MA. Management of primary knee osteoarthritis and indications for total knee arthroplasty for general practitioners. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2012;112(11):709–15.23139341
11. Matharu GS Garriga C Rangan A Judge A Does Regional Anesthesia reduce complications following total hip and knee replacement compared with General Anesthesia? An analysis from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man J Arthroplasty 2020 35 6 1521 e15281525 10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.003 32216984
Matharu GS, Garriga C, Rangan A, Judge A. Does Regional Anesthesia reduce complications following total hip and knee replacement compared with General Anesthesia? An analysis from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(6):1521–e15281525.32216984 10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.003
12. Saltzman BM Frank RM Davey A Cotter EJ Redondo ML Naveen N Wang KC Cole BJ Lack of standardization among clinical trials of injection therapies for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review Phys Sportsmed 2020 48 3 266 89 10.1080/00913847.2020.1726716 32027200
Saltzman BM, Frank RM, Davey A, Cotter EJ, Redondo ML, Naveen N, Wang KC, Cole BJ. Lack of standardization among clinical trials of injection therapies for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Phys Sportsmed. 2020;48(3):266–89.32027200 10.1080/00913847.2020.1726716
13. Allen KD Arbeeva L Callahan LF Golightly YM Goode AP Heiderscheit BC Huffman KM Severson HH Schwartz TA Physical therapy vs internet-based exercise training for patients with knee osteoarthritis: results of a randomized controlled trial Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2018 26 3 383 96 10.1016/j.joca.2017.12.008 29307722
Allen KD, Arbeeva L, Callahan LF, Golightly YM, Goode AP, Heiderscheit BC, Huffman KM, Severson HH, Schwartz TA. Physical therapy vs internet-based exercise training for patients with knee osteoarthritis: results of a randomized controlled trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2018;26(3):383–96.29307722 10.1016/j.joca.2017.12.008
14. Gregori D Giacovelli G Minto C Barbetta B Gualtieri F Azzolina D Vaghi P Rovati LC Association of pharmacological treatments with Long-Term Pain Control in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and Meta-analysis JAMA 2018 320 24 2564 79 10.1001/jama.2018.19319 30575881
Gregori D, Giacovelli G, Minto C, Barbetta B, Gualtieri F, Azzolina D, Vaghi P, Rovati LC. Association of pharmacological treatments with Long-Term Pain Control in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2018;320(24):2564–79.30575881 10.1001/jama.2018.19319
15. Phillips K Clauw DJ Central pain mechanisms in the rheumatic diseases: future directions Arthritis Rheum 2013 65 2 291 302 10.1002/art.37739 23045168
Phillips K, Clauw DJ. Central pain mechanisms in the rheumatic diseases: future directions. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65(2):291–302.23045168 10.1002/art.37739
16. Finan PH Buenaver LF Bounds SC Hussain S Park RJ Haque UJ Campbell CM Haythornthwaite JA Edwards RR Smith MT Discordance between pain and radiographic severity in knee osteoarthritis: findings from quantitative sensory testing of central sensitization Arthritis Rheum 2013 65 2 363 72 10.1002/art.34646 22961435
Finan PH, Buenaver LF, Bounds SC, Hussain S, Park RJ, Haque UJ, Campbell CM, Haythornthwaite JA, Edwards RR, Smith MT. Discordance between pain and radiographic severity in knee osteoarthritis: findings from quantitative sensory testing of central sensitization. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65(2):363–72.22961435 10.1002/art.34646
17. Cruz-Almeida Y, Sibille KT, Goodin BR, Petrov ME, Bartley EJ, Riley JL 3rd, King CD, Glover TL, Sotolongo A, Herbert MS, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in older adults with knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014;66(7):1800–10.
18. King CD Sibille KT Goodin BR Cruz-Almeida Y Glover TL Bartley E Riley JL Herbert MS Sotolongo A Schmidt J Experimental pain sensitivity differs as a function of clinical pain severity in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2013 21 9 1243 52 10.1016/j.joca.2013.05.015 23973137
King CD, Sibille KT, Goodin BR, Cruz-Almeida Y, Glover TL, Bartley E, Riley JL, Herbert MS, Sotolongo A, Schmidt J, et al. Experimental pain sensitivity differs as a function of clinical pain severity in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21(9):1243–52.23973137 10.1016/j.joca.2013.05.015
19. Dasilva AF Mendonca ME Zaghi S Lopes M Dossantos MF Spierings EL Bajwa Z Datta A Bikson M Fregni F tDCS-induced analgesia and electrical fields in pain-related neural networks in chronic migraine Headache 2012 52 8 1283 95 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2012.02141.x 22512348
Dasilva AF, Mendonca ME, Zaghi S, Lopes M, Dossantos MF, Spierings EL, Bajwa Z, Datta A, Bikson M, Fregni F. tDCS-induced analgesia and electrical fields in pain-related neural networks in chronic migraine. Headache. 2012;52(8):1283–95.22512348 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2012.02141.x
20. Lefaucheur JP Antal A Ayache SS Benninger DH Brunelin J Cogiamanian F Cotelli M De Ridder D Ferrucci R Langguth B Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) Clin Neurophysiol 2017 128 1 56 92 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087 27866120
Lefaucheur JP, Antal A, Ayache SS, Benninger DH, Brunelin J, Cogiamanian F, Cotelli M, De Ridder D, Ferrucci R, Langguth B, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;128(1):56–92.27866120 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087
21. Rodrigues GM Paixão A Arruda T de Oliveira BRR Maranhão Neto GA Marques Neto SR Lattari E Machado S Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation increases muscular strength and reduces Pain Perception in Women with Patellofemoral Pain J Strength Cond Res 2022 36 2 371 8 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003473 34197060
Rodrigues GM, Paixão A, Arruda T, de Oliveira BRR, Maranhão Neto GA, Marques Neto SR, Lattari E, Machado S. Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation increases muscular strength and reduces Pain Perception in Women with Patellofemoral Pain. J Strength Cond Res. 2022;36(2):371–8.34197060 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003473
22. Kang JH Choi SE Park DJ Xu H Lee JK Lee SS Effects of add-on transcranial direct current stimulation on pain in Korean patients with fibromyalgia Sci Rep 2020 10 1 12114 10.1038/s41598-020-69131-7 32694653
Kang JH, Choi SE, Park DJ, Xu H, Lee JK, Lee SS. Effects of add-on transcranial direct current stimulation on pain in Korean patients with fibromyalgia. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12114.32694653 10.1038/s41598-020-69131-7
23. Luedtke K Rushton A Wright C Jürgens T Polzer A Mueller G May A Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation preceding cognitive behavioural management for chronic low back pain: sham controlled double blinded randomised controlled trial BMJ 2015 350 h1640 10.1136/bmj.h1640 25883244
Luedtke K, Rushton A, Wright C, Jürgens T, Polzer A, Mueller G, May A. Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation preceding cognitive behavioural management for chronic low back pain: sham controlled double blinded randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2015;350:h1640.25883244 10.1136/bmj.h1640
24. Bruce AS Howard JS McBride HVANW Needle JM The effects of Transcranial Direct current stimulation on chronic ankle instability Med Sci Sports Exerc 2020 52 2 335 44 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002129 31453883
Bruce AS, Howard JS, McBride HVANW, Needle JM. The effects of Transcranial Direct current stimulation on chronic ankle instability. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2020;52(2):335–44.31453883 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002129
25. O’Connell NE Marston L Spencer S DeSouza LH Wand BM Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018 4 4 Cd008208 29652088
O’Connell NE, Marston L, Spencer S, DeSouza LH, Wand BM. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;4(4):Cd008208.29652088
26. Azizi S Rezasoltani Z Najafi S Mohebi B Tabatabaee SM Dadarkhah A Transcranial direct current stimulation for knee osteoarthritis: a single-blind randomized sham-controlled trial Neurophysiol Clin 2021 51 4 329 38 10.1016/j.neucli.2020.12.002 33323306
Azizi S, Rezasoltani Z, Najafi S, Mohebi B, Tabatabaee SM, Dadarkhah A. Transcranial direct current stimulation for knee osteoarthritis: a single-blind randomized sham-controlled trial. Neurophysiol Clin. 2021;51(4):329–38.33323306 10.1016/j.neucli.2020.12.002
27. Chang W-J, Bennell KL, Hodges PW, Hinman RS, Young CL, Buscemi V, Liston MB, Schabrun SM. Addition of transcranial direct current stimulation to quadriceps strengthening exercise in knee osteoarthritis: a pilot randomised controlled trial. PLoS ONE 2017, 12(6).
28. Martorella G Mathis K Miao H Wang D Park L Ahn H Self-administered transcranial direct current stimulation for pain in older adults with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled study Brain Stimul 2022 15 4 902 9 10.1016/j.brs.2022.06.003 35690388
Martorella G, Mathis K, Miao H, Wang D, Park L, Ahn H. Self-administered transcranial direct current stimulation for pain in older adults with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled study. Brain Stimul. 2022;15(4):902–9.35690388 10.1016/j.brs.2022.06.003
29. Regina BTD, Erika FOJ, Marcia VAS, Carolina PNPA, Kuraoka TK, Martins GF, Bonin PC, Fania CS, Felipe F, Fernandes MTV. Motor Cortex Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation effects on knee Osteoarthritis Pain in Elderly subjects with Dysfunctional Descending Pain Inhibitory System: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Brain Stimul 2021, 14(3).
30. Ahn H Woods A Choi E Padhye N Fillingim R Efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation on clinical pain severity in older adults with knee os-teoarthritis pain: a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled pilot clinical study J Pain 2017 18 4 S87 8 10.1016/j.jpain.2017.02.306
Ahn H, Woods A, Choi E, Padhye N, Fillingim R. Efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation on clinical pain severity in older adults with knee os-teoarthritis pain: a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled pilot clinical study. J Pain. 2017;18(4):S87–8.10.1016/j.jpain.2017.02.306
31. Martorella G, Mathis K, Miao H, Wang D, Park L, Ahn H. Efficacy of home-based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Experimental Pain Sensitivity in older adults with knee osteoarthritis: a Randomized, Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial. J Clin Med 2022, 11(17).
32. Ahn H Suchting R Woods AJ Miao H Green C Cho RY Choi E Fillingim RB Bayesian analysis of the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on experimental pain sensitivity in older adults with knee osteoarthritis: randomized sham-controlled pilot clinical study J Pain Res 2018 11 2071 81 10.2147/JPR.S173080 30310309
Ahn H, Suchting R, Woods AJ, Miao H, Green C, Cho RY, Choi E, Fillingim RB. Bayesian analysis of the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on experimental pain sensitivity in older adults with knee osteoarthritis: randomized sham-controlled pilot clinical study. J Pain Res. 2018;11:2071–81.30310309 10.2147/JPR.S173080
33. Liberati A Altman DG Tetzlaff J Mulrow C Gøtzsche PC Ioannidis JP Clarke M Devereaux PJ Kleijnen J Moher D The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration J Clin Epidemiol 2009 62 10 e1 34 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 19631507
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34.19631507 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006
34. Higgins JP Altman DG Gøtzsche PC Jüni P Moher D Oxman AD Savovic J Schulz KF Weeks L Sterne JA The Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials BMJ 2011 343 d5928 10.1136/bmj.d5928 22008217
Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA. The Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.22008217 10.1136/bmj.d5928
35. Atkins D Best D Briss PA Eccles M Falck-Ytter Y Flottorp S Guyatt GH Harbour RT Haugh MC Henry D Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations BMJ 2004 328 7454 1490 10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 15205295
Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490.15205295 10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490
36. Hawker GA Mian S Kendzerska T French M Measures of adult pain: visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and measure of intermittent and constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP) Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011 63 Suppl 11 S240 252 22588748
Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M. Measures of adult pain: visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and measure of intermittent and constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(Suppl 11):S240–252.22588748
37. Uddin Z MacDermid JC Quantitative sensory testing in Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Pain Med 2016 17 9 1694 703 10.1093/pm/pnv105 26893116
Uddin Z, MacDermid JC. Quantitative sensory testing in Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain. Pain Med. 2016;17(9):1694–703.26893116 10.1093/pm/pnv105
38. Bellamy N Buchanan WW Goldsmith CH Campbell J Stitt LW Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee J Rheumatol 1988 15 12 1833 40 3068365
Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833–40.3068365
39. Seror R Tubach F Baron G Falissard B Logeart I Dougados M Ravaud P Individualising the Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) function subscale: incorporating patient priorities for improvement to measure functional impairment in hip or knee osteoarthritis Ann Rheum Dis 2008 67 4 494 9 10.1136/ard.2007.074591 17704063
Seror R, Tubach F, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Dougados M, Ravaud P. Individualising the Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) function subscale: incorporating patient priorities for improvement to measure functional impairment in hip or knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(4):494–9.17704063 10.1136/ard.2007.074591
40. Yang KG Raijmakers NJ Verbout AJ Dhert WJ Saris DB Validation of the short-form WOMAC function scale for the evaluation of osteoarthritis of the knee J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007 89 1 50 6 10.1302/0301-620X.89B1.17790 17259416
Yang KG, Raijmakers NJ, Verbout AJ, Dhert WJ, Saris DB. Validation of the short-form WOMAC function scale for the evaluation of osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89(1):50–6.17259416 10.1302/0301-620X.89B1.17790
41. Salavati M Mazaheri M Negahban H Sohani SM Ebrahimian MR Ebrahimi I Kazemnejad A Salavati M Validation of a persian-version of knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) in iranians with knee injuries Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008 16 10 1178 82 10.1016/j.joca.2008.03.004 18411065
Salavati M, Mazaheri M, Negahban H, Sohani SM, Ebrahimian MR, Ebrahimi I, Kazemnejad A, Salavati M. Validation of a persian-version of knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) in iranians with knee injuries. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008;16(10):1178–82.18411065 10.1016/j.joca.2008.03.004
42. Ye H Yang JM Luo Y Long Y Zhang JH Zhong YB Gao F Wang MY Do dietary supplements prevent loss of muscle mass and strength during muscle disuse? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Front Nutr 2023 10 1093988 10.3389/fnut.2023.1093988 37252241
Ye H, Yang JM, Luo Y, Long Y, Zhang JH, Zhong YB, Gao F, Wang MY. Do dietary supplements prevent loss of muscle mass and strength during muscle disuse? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Nutr. 2023;10:1093988.37252241 10.3389/fnut.2023.1093988
43. Higgins JP Thompson SG Deeks JJ Altman DG Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses BMJ 2003 327 7414 557 60 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 12958120
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–60.12958120 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
44. Fu K Robbins SR McDougall JJ Osteoarthritis: the genesis of pain Rheumatology (Oxford) 2018 57 suppl4 iv43 50 10.1093/rheumatology/kex419 29267879
Fu K, Robbins SR, McDougall JJ. Osteoarthritis: the genesis of pain. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2018;57(suppl4):iv43–50.29267879 10.1093/rheumatology/kex419
45. Barbour KE Boring M Helmick CG Murphy LB Qin J Prevalence of severe Joint Pain among adults with doctor-diagnosed arthritis - United States, 2002–2014 MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2016 65 39 1052 6 10.15585/mmwr.mm6539a2 27711038
Barbour KE, Boring M, Helmick CG, Murphy LB, Qin J. Prevalence of severe Joint Pain among adults with doctor-diagnosed arthritis - United States, 2002–2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(39):1052–6.27711038 10.15585/mmwr.mm6539a2
46. Rakel B Vance C Zimmerman MB Petsas-Blodgett N Amendola A Sluka KA Mechanical hyperalgesia and reduced quality of life occur in people with mild knee osteoarthritis pain Clin J Pain 2015 31 4 315 22 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000116 24866856
Rakel B, Vance C, Zimmerman MB, Petsas-Blodgett N, Amendola A, Sluka KA. Mechanical hyperalgesia and reduced quality of life occur in people with mild knee osteoarthritis pain. Clin J Pain. 2015;31(4):315–22.24866856 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000116
47. Bartholomew C Lack S Neal B Altered pain processing and sensitisation is evident in adults with patellofemoral pain: a systematic review including meta-analysis and meta-regression Scand J Pain 2019 20 1 11 27 10.1515/sjpain-2019-0079 31560652
Bartholomew C, Lack S, Neal B. Altered pain processing and sensitisation is evident in adults with patellofemoral pain: a systematic review including meta-analysis and meta-regression. Scand J Pain. 2019;20(1):11–27.31560652 10.1515/sjpain-2019-0079
48. Moreton BJ Tew V das Nair R Wheeler M Walsh DA Lincoln NB Pain phenotype in patients with knee osteoarthritis: classification and measurement properties of painDETECT and self-report Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs scale in a cross-sectional study Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2015 67 4 519 28 10.1002/acr.22431 25155472
Moreton BJ, Tew V, das Nair R, Wheeler M, Walsh DA, Lincoln NB. Pain phenotype in patients with knee osteoarthritis: classification and measurement properties of painDETECT and self-report Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs scale in a cross-sectional study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2015;67(4):519–28.25155472 10.1002/acr.22431
49. Neogi T Guermazi A Roemer F Nevitt MC Scholz J Arendt-Nielsen L Woolf C Niu J Bradley LA Quinn E Association of joint inflammation with Pain sensitization in knee osteoarthritis: the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study Arthritis Rheumatol 2016 68 3 654 61 10.1002/art.39488 26554395
Neogi T, Guermazi A, Roemer F, Nevitt MC, Scholz J, Arendt-Nielsen L, Woolf C, Niu J, Bradley LA, Quinn E, et al. Association of joint inflammation with Pain sensitization in knee osteoarthritis: the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016;68(3):654–61.26554395 10.1002/art.39488
50. Charvet LE Shaw MT Bikson M Woods AJ Knotkova H Supervised transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) at home: a guide for clinical research and practice Brain Stimul 2020 13 3 686 93 10.1016/j.brs.2020.02.011 32289698
Charvet LE, Shaw MT, Bikson M, Woods AJ, Knotkova H. Supervised transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) at home: a guide for clinical research and practice. Brain Stimul. 2020;13(3):686–93.32289698 10.1016/j.brs.2020.02.011
51. Ouellette AL Liston MB Chang WJ Walton DM Wand BM Schabrun SM Safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with sensorimotor retraining in chronic low back pain: a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial BMJ Open 2017 7 8 e013080 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013080 28827229
Ouellette AL, Liston MB, Chang WJ, Walton DM, Wand BM, Schabrun SM. Safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with sensorimotor retraining in chronic low back pain: a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e013080.28827229 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013080
52. Zortea M Ramalho L Alves RL Alves C Braulio G Torres I Fregni F Caumo W Transcranial Direct current stimulation to improve the dysfunction of descending Pain Modulatory System related to Opioids in Chronic Non-cancer Pain: an integrative review of Neurobiology and Meta-Analysis Front Neurosci 2019 13 1218 10.3389/fnins.2019.01218 31803005
Zortea M, Ramalho L, Alves RL, Alves C, Braulio G, Torres I, Fregni F, Caumo W. Transcranial Direct current stimulation to improve the dysfunction of descending Pain Modulatory System related to Opioids in Chronic Non-cancer Pain: an integrative review of Neurobiology and Meta-Analysis. Front Neurosci. 2019;13:1218.31803005 10.3389/fnins.2019.01218
53. Maarrawi J Peyron R Mertens P Costes N Magnin M Sindou M Laurent B Garcia-Larrea L Motor cortex stimulation for pain control induces changes in the endogenous opioid system Neurology 2007 69 9 827 34 10.1212/01.wnl.0000269783.86997.37 17724284
Maarrawi J, Peyron R, Mertens P, Costes N, Magnin M, Sindou M, Laurent B, Garcia-Larrea L. Motor cortex stimulation for pain control induces changes in the endogenous opioid system. Neurology. 2007;69(9):827–34.17724284 10.1212/01.wnl.0000269783.86997.37
54. Nitsche MA Grundey J Liebetanz D Lang N Tergau F Paulus W Catecholaminergic consolidation of motor cortical neuroplasticity in humans Cereb Cortex 2004 14 11 1240 5 10.1093/cercor/bhh085 15142961
Nitsche MA, Grundey J, Liebetanz D, Lang N, Tergau F, Paulus W. Catecholaminergic consolidation of motor cortical neuroplasticity in humans. Cereb Cortex. 2004;14(11):1240–5.15142961 10.1093/cercor/bhh085
55. Nitsche MA Jaussi W Liebetanz D Lang N Tergau F Paulus W Consolidation of human motor cortical neuroplasticity by D-cycloserine Neuropsychopharmacology 2004 29 8 1573 8 10.1038/sj.npp.1300517 15199378
Nitsche MA, Jaussi W, Liebetanz D, Lang N, Tergau F, Paulus W. Consolidation of human motor cortical neuroplasticity by D-cycloserine. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2004;29(8):1573–8.15199378 10.1038/sj.npp.1300517
56. Nitsche MA Liebetanz D Schlitterlau A Henschke U Fricke K Frommann K Lang N Henning S Paulus W Tergau F GABAergic modulation of DC stimulation-induced motor cortex excitability shifts in humans Eur J Neurosci 2004 19 10 2720 6 10.1111/j.0953-816X.2004.03398.x 15147306
Nitsche MA, Liebetanz D, Schlitterlau A, Henschke U, Fricke K, Frommann K, Lang N, Henning S, Paulus W, Tergau F. GABAergic modulation of DC stimulation-induced motor cortex excitability shifts in humans. Eur J Neurosci. 2004;19(10):2720–6.15147306 10.1111/j.0953-816X.2004.03398.x
57. Nitsche MA Lampe C Antal A Liebetanz D Lang N Tergau F Paulus W Dopaminergic modulation of long-lasting direct current-induced cortical excitability changes in the human motor cortex Eur J Neurosci 2006 23 6 1651 7 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04676.x 16553629
Nitsche MA, Lampe C, Antal A, Liebetanz D, Lang N, Tergau F, Paulus W. Dopaminergic modulation of long-lasting direct current-induced cortical excitability changes in the human motor cortex. Eur J Neurosci. 2006;23(6):1651–7.16553629 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.04676.x
58. Nitsche MA Kuo MF Karrasch R Wächter B Liebetanz D Paulus W Serotonin affects transcranial direct current-induced neuroplasticity in humans Biol Psychiatry 2009 66 5 503 8 10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.03.022 19427633
Nitsche MA, Kuo MF, Karrasch R, Wächter B, Liebetanz D, Paulus W. Serotonin affects transcranial direct current-induced neuroplasticity in humans. Biol Psychiatry. 2009;66(5):503–8.19427633 10.1016/j.biopsych.2009.03.022
59. Schabrun SM Jones E Elgueta Cancino EL Hodges PW Targeting chronic recurrent low back pain from the top-down and the bottom-up: a combined transcranial direct current stimulation and peripheral electrical stimulation intervention Brain Stimul 2014 7 3 451 9 10.1016/j.brs.2014.01.058 24582372
Schabrun SM, Jones E, Elgueta Cancino EL, Hodges PW. Targeting chronic recurrent low back pain from the top-down and the bottom-up: a combined transcranial direct current stimulation and peripheral electrical stimulation intervention. Brain Stimul. 2014;7(3):451–9.24582372 10.1016/j.brs.2014.01.058
60. Emmert D Rasche T Stieber C Conrad R Mücke M [Knee pain - symptoms, diagnosis and therapy of osteoarthritis] MMW Fortschr Med 2018 160 15 58 64 10.1007/s15006-018-0023-1 30206896
Emmert D, Rasche T, Stieber C, Conrad R, Mücke M. [Knee pain - symptoms, diagnosis and therapy of osteoarthritis]. MMW Fortschr Med. 2018;160(15):58–64.30206896 10.1007/s15006-018-0023-1
61. Geng R Li J Yu C Zhang C Chen F Chen J Ni H Wang J Kang K Wei Z Knee osteoarthritis: current status and research progress in treatment (review) Exp Ther Med 2023 26 4 481 10.3892/etm.2023.12180 37745043
Geng R, Li J, Yu C, Zhang C, Chen F, Chen J, Ni H, Wang J, Kang K, Wei Z, et al. Knee osteoarthritis: current status and research progress in treatment (review). Exp Ther Med. 2023;26(4):481.37745043 10.3892/etm.2023.12180
