title: Analgesia and non-aspirin, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis of the hip.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To review all randomized trials of analgesics and anti-inflammatory therapy in osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip. To determine which non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) is the most effective, and which NSAID is the most toxic.
  
  
  METHODS
  We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group's trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Medline up to August 1994. Reference lists of all trials were also manually searched.
  
  
  METHODS
  All randomized controlled trials comparing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and/or analgesics in patients with Osteoarthritis. The trials selected for inclusion were identified by one reviewer (TT) and rechecked by a second (MH).
  
  
  METHODS
  Qualitative assessments were performed using a quality scoring system designed for NSAID trials in rheumatoid arthritis. Both the design and analysis aspects of the trials were evaluated, each aspect being rated on a scale of 0 to 8. A quantitative method, which calculates the ratio of improvement produced by one NSAID to that produced by another, was used to rate the relative efficacy of different NSAIDs with respect to pain relief. Toxicity comparisons were made according to the reviewer findings. All quality assessments were carried out independently by two reviewers (TT, BS). All data abstraction was carried out by one reviewer (TT) and rechecked by two other reviewers (BS, GW). A consensus was reached on discrepancies.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Forty-three trials were identified, and of these, 39 evaluated NSAIDs, while four evaluated only analgesics. The median design and analysis scores were two and four respectively. Six NSAIDs were included in at least five trials. Of these, indomethacin was rated more effective in five of its seven comparisons, but more toxic in seven of 12 comparisons. Only five of the 29 (17%) NSAID comparisons found statistically significant differences in efficacy. Of the 43 RCTs identified only 17 had statistical data available for future pooling for this meta-analysis. In the case where data was missing, authors of the trials will be contacted for inclusion of data in future reviews.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  NSAID trials in patients with OA of the hip appear to be weakened by the lack of standardization of case definition of OA, and also by the lack of standardization of outcome assessments. No clear recommendations for the choice of specific NSAID therapy in hip OA can be offered at this time based on this analysis.
authors.affiliation: Medicine and of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen's University, Etherington Hall-Room 2066, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, K7L 3N6. tt5@post.queensu.ca
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Towheed
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Shea
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Wells
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Hochberg
mesh_terms: D000700:Analgesics / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D000894:Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D006801:Humans; D015207:Osteoarthritis, Hip / Q000150:complications / Q000188:drug therapy*; D010146:Pain / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000209:etiology
chemical_list: D000700:Analgesics; D000894:Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal