Skip to main content

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Table 6 Univariate meta-regression analysis for assessing the effect of suspected variables on the pooled WMD of outcomes

From: The effectiveness of vibration therapy for muscle peak torque and postural control in individuals with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

Outcome

Variable

β

95% confidence interval for β

P value

ML postural control (CE)

Year of study

0.12

–0.59, 0.85

0.264

Vibration type

–

–

–

Vibration frequency

0.69

–5.02, 6.42

0.365

 

Vibration time (week)a

0.03

–1.11, 1.17

0.811

AP postural control (CE)

Year of study

0.42

–0.71, 1.56

0.249

Vibration type

0.34

–14.12, 14.81

0.927

Vibration frequency

4.43

0.18, 8.68

0.046

 

Vibration time (week)a

0.29

–4.41, 5.00

0.557

ML postural control (OE)

Year of study

–0.23

–3.86, 3.38

0.556

Vibration type

–2.23

–6.37, 1.89

0.092

Vibration frequency

1.11

–0.94, 3.18

0.092

 

Vibration time (week)a

–0.17

–3.19, 2.84

0.599

AP postural control (OE)

Year of study

0.10

–1.02, 1.23

0.444

Vibration type

–

–

–

Vibration frequency

–0.06

–13.50, 13.36

0.958

 

Vibration time (week)a

–

–

–

Hamstring PT

Year of study

5.64

–24.84, 36.12

0.256

Vibration type

–5.62

–139.26, 128.01

0.678

Vibration frequency

5.64

–24.84, 36.12

0.256

 

Vibration time (week)a

–

–

–

Quadriceps PT

Year of study

–0.02

–0.06, 0.01

0.138

Vibration type

–0.05

–0.50, 0.35

0.769

Vibration frequency

–0.01

–0.28, 0.25

0.894

 

Vibration time (week)a

–0.01

–0.02, 0.01

0.655

  1. PT peak torque, AP anterioposterior, ML mediolateral, CE closed-eye, OE open-eye
  2. aTime interval from surgery to intervention