Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation for quadriceps strengthening pre and post total knee replacement

Surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation for quadriceps strengthening pre and post total knee replacement

Patient or population: for quadriceps strengthening pre and post total knee replacement
Settings: Any
Intervention: Surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Control

Surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation

Function
Scales: Timed up and go test, Functional stair test and Nottingham health profile
Follow‐up: 3 to 12 weeks1

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

0
(2 studies2)

See comment

Data not presented in a format to allow meta‐analysis to be carried out

Patient Satisfaction ‐ not measured

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

See comment

Not measured

Pain ‐ not measured

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

See comment

Not measured

Quadriceps strength

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

0
(2 studies2)

See comment

Data not presented in a format to allow meta‐analysis to be carried out

Quadriceps activation

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

34
(1 study)

See comment

Data not presented in a format to allow meta‐analysis to be carried out

Adverse effects ‐ burns, skin damage, or cardiac arrhythmias ‐ not measured

See comment

See comment

Not estimable

See comment

Not measured

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval;

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 Patients followed up at three, six, nine, and twelve weeks.
2 Total numbers for the intervention and control groups are not specified in the study by Oldham (1995) therefore the figures cannot be combined.

Figures and Tables -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation for quadriceps strengthening pre and post total knee replacement