|
Included studies
|
Comparisons
|
Pairwise meta-analysis
|
|---|
|
WMD (95% CI)
|
I2
|
Ph
|
|---|
|
Flexion contracture improvement
|
|
2 studies
|
C VS. B
|
− 0.49 (− 1.72− 0.75)
|
63.2%
|
0.10
|
|
2 studies
|
D VS. B
|
0.22 (− 1.40–1.85)
|
0%
|
0.63
|
|
Knee flexion improvement
|
|
3 study
|
D VS. A
|
− 1.54 (− 3.97–0.88)
|
64.6%
|
0.06
|
|
2 studies
|
C VS. B
|
6.00 (2.49–9.50)
|
84.4%
|
0.01
|
|
2 studies
|
D VS. B
|
2.37 (− 1.83–6.58)
|
12.9%
|
0.28
|
|
KS function score improvement
|
|
2 studies
|
C VS. B
|
2.36 (− 0.92–5.64)
|
0%
|
0.40
|
|
2 studies
|
D VS. B
|
0.51 (− 3.79–4.80)
|
0%
|
0.52
|
|
KS knee score improvement
|
|
2 studies
|
C VS. B
|
2.37 (− 0.16–4.89)
|
91.80%
|
< 0.01
|
|
2 studies
|
D VS. B
|
− 1.16 (− 4.18–1.84)
|
0%
|
0.38
|
- WMD weighted mean difference, 95% CI 95% confidence intervals, KS knee society. A, The change of PCO decrease of 2 mm or more. B, The change of PCO decrease by 0 mm to 2 mm. C, The change of PCO increase by 0 mm to 2 mm. D, The change of PCO increase by 2 mm or more
