Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 656

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Surgery versus Physical Therapy for a Meniscal Tear and Osteoarthritis

Open access
Katz, Jeffrey N., Brophy, Robert H., Chaisson, Christine E., de Chaves, Leigh, Cole, Brian J., Dahm, Diane L., Donnell-Fink, Laurel A., Guermazi, Ali, Haas, Amanda K., Jones, Morgan H., Levy, Bruce A., Mandl, Lisa A., Martin, Scott D., Marx, Robert G., Miniaci, Anthony, Matava, Matthew J., Palmisano, Joseph, Reinke, Emily K., Richardson, Brian E., Rome, Benjamin N., Safran-Norton, Clare E., Skoniecki, Debra J., Solomon, Daniel H., Smith, Matthew V., Spindler, Kurt P., Stuart, Michael J., Wright, John, Wright, Rick W., Losina, Elena·2013·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Whether arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for symptomatic patients with a meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis results in better functional outcomes than nonoperative therapy is uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving symptomatic patients 45 years of age or older with a meniscal tear and evidence of mild-to-moderate osteoarthritis on imaging. We randomly assigned 351 patients to surgery and postoperative physical therapy or to a standardized physical-therapy regimen (with the option to cross over to surgery at the discretion of the patient and surgeon). The patients were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was the difference between the groups with respect to the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical-function score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms) 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, the mean improvement in the WOMAC score after 6 months was 20.9 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.9 to 23.9) in the surgical group and 18.5 (95% CI, 15.6 to 21.5) in the physical-therapy group (mean difference, 2.4 points; 95% CI, -1.8 to 6.5). At 6 months, 51 active participants in the study who were assigned to physical therapy alone (30%) had undergone surgery, and 9 patients assigned to surgery (6%) had not undergone surgery. The results at 12 months were similar to those at 6 months. The frequency of adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, we did not find significant differences between the study groups in functional improvement 6 months after randomization; however, 30% of the patients who were assigned to physical therapy alone underwent surgery within 6 months. (Funded by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00597012.).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1301408

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Katz, J. N., Brophy, R. H., Chaisson, C. E., de Chaves, L., Cole, B. J., Dahm, D. L., Donnell-Fink, L. A., Guermazi, A., Haas, A. K., Jones, M. H., Levy, B. A., Mandl, L. A., Martin, S. D., Marx, R. G., Miniaci, A., Matava, M. J., Palmisano, J., Reinke, E. K., Richardson, B. E., Rome, B. N., Safran-Norton, C. E., Skoniecki, D. J., Solomon, D. H., Smith, M. V., Spindler, K. P., Stuart, M. J., Wright, J., Wright, R. W., & Losina, E.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2013-05-02
Volume
368
Issue
18
Pages
1675-1684
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2098656787
Cited by
656
References
4
FWCI
52.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.