scholarly journals Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Combined with Exercises versus an Exercise Program on the Pain and the Function in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Mizusaki Imoto ◽  
Stella Peccin ◽  
Kelson Nonato Gomes da Silva ◽  
Lucas Emmanuel Pedro de Paiva Teixeira ◽  
Marcelo Ismael Abrahão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Functional Improvement ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Objectives. To investigate the effect of 8 weeks of NMES + Ex (neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with exercises) on pain and functional improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) compared to exercise (Ex) alone.Design. Randomized controlled trial.Setting. A specialty outpatient clinic.Participants. Patients (N=100; women = 86, men = 14; age range, 50–75 years) with knee OA.Interventions. Participants were randomly assigned to NMES + Ex or Ex group.Outcome Measures. Numerical Rating Scale 0 to 10 (NRS) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test were the primary outcomes. The secondary outcomes used were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).Results. Following the interventions, a statistically significant improvement in both groups was observed in all outcomes assessed. For the comparison between the groups, no statistically significant difference was found between the NMES + Ex and the Ex groups in NRS (P=0.52), TUG test (P=0.12), and aspects of WOMAC: pain (P=0.26), function (P=0.23), and stiffness (P=0.63).Conclusion. The addition of NMES to exercise did not improve the outcomes assessed in knee OA patients. This study was registered at the Australian Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN012607000357459).

scholarly journals Preparing for an orthopedic consultation using an eHealth tool: a randomized controlled trial in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aniek A. O. M. Claassen ◽  
Henk J. Schers ◽  
Vincent J. J. F. Busch ◽  
Petra J. C. Heesterbeek ◽  
Frank H. J. van den Hoogen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Information Provision ◽  
Treatment Beliefs ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background To evaluate the effect of a stand-alone mobile and web-based educational intervention (eHealth tool) compared to usual preparation of a first orthopedic consultation of patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) on patients’ satisfaction. Methods A two-armed randomized controlled trial involving 286 patients with (suspicion of) hip or knee OA, randomly allocated to either receiving an educational eHealth tool to prepare their upcoming consultation (n = 144) or usual care (n = 142). Satisfaction with the consultation on three subscales (range 1–4) of the Consumer Quality Index (CQI - primary outcome) and knowledge (assessed using 22 statements on OA, range 0–22), treatment beliefs (assessed by the Treatment beliefs in OsteoArthritis questionnaire, range 1–5), assessment of patient’s involvement in consultation by the surgeon (assessed on a 5-point Likert scale) and patient satisfaction with the outcome of the consultation (numeric rating scale), were assessed. Results No differences between groups were observed on the 3 subscales of the CQI (group difference (95% CI): communication 0.009 (− 0.10, 0.12), conduct − 0.02 (− 0.12, 0.07) and information provision 0.02 (− 0.18, 0.21)). Between group differences (95% CI) were in favor of the intervention group for knowledge (1.4 (0.6, 2.2)), negative beliefs regarding physical activities (− 0.19 (− 0.37, − 0.002) and pain medication (− 0.30 (− 0.49, − 0.01)). We found no differences on other secondary outcomes. Conclusions An educational eHealth tool to prepare a first orthopedic consultation for hip or knee OA does not result in higher patient satisfaction with the consultation, but it does influence cognitions about osteoarthritis. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register (trial number NTR6262). Registered 30 January 2017.

scholarly journals Open release versus radiofrequency microtenotomy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a prospective randomized controlled trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharine Hamlin ◽  
Christopher Munro ◽  
Scott L. Barker ◽  
Sean McKenna ◽  
Kapil Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Grip Strength ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Numerical Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Lateral Epicondylitis ◽  
Open Release ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Significant Difference

Background Optimal surgical treatment of lateral epicondylitis remains uncertain. Recently, radiofrequency microtenotomy (RFMT) has been proposed as a suitable treatment. We compared RFMT with standard open release (OR) in this prospective randomized controlled trial. Methods In total, 41 patients with symptoms for at least 6 months were randomized into two groups: 23 patients had RFMT and 18 had OR. Two patients from RFMT withdrew. Each patient underwent Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain score, grip strength and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores pre-operatively and at 6 weeks. Pain and DASH scores were repeated at 6 months and 12 months. Results NRS pain scores improved by 4.8 points for RFMT and by 3.9 points for OR. There was a significant improvement in both groups from pre-operative scores, although there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at 1 year. Grip strength improved by 31% in the RFMT group compared to 38% in OR. There was no significant difference between the initial and 6 weeks scores or between treatments. At 1 year, DASH was 39.8 points for RFMT and 24.4 points for OR. There was a significant improvement in both groups from pre-operative scores, although there was no statistically significant difference between the groups at 1 year. Conclusions Both groups showed significant improvements and similar benefit to the patient. The results of the present study do not show any benefit of RFMT over the standard OR. As a result of the extra expense of RFMT, we therefore recommend that OR is offered as the standard surgical management.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of a centrally acting analgesic flupirtine in primary knee osteoarthritis in comparison to tramadol: a randomized controlled trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 381
Author(s):  
Tanmoy Kanti Goswami ◽  
Pradip Kumar Ghoshal ◽  
Avijit Hazra ◽  
Asish Biswas
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Opioid Analgesics ◽  
Womac Score ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Considerable Morbidity

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic, degenerative joint disorder responsible for considerable morbidity, particularly in old age. Flupirtine, a new centrally acting analgesic, is devoid of the adverse effects of NSAIDs and opioid analgesics. In this study author compared the effectiveness and safety of flupirtine with tramadol in knee OA.Methods: An open label, randomized, controlled trial was done with patients of primary knee OA of both sexes, age >50 years. Patients were recruited from Rheumatology OPD of SSKM Hospital. A minimum WOMAC score of 35 was essential for recruitment. Patients with serious comorbidities were excluded. They were treated orally with either flupirtine (100mg thrice daily) or tramadol (50mg thrice daily) for 12 weeks.Results: Ninety patients were recruited and data of 42 on flupirtine and 41 on tramadol were analysed. There was significant improvement in pain, stiffness and physical function compared to baseline in both the groups. However, there was no significant difference between groups at 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Responder rate (50% reduction in pain score from baseline) was 66.67% with flupirtine and 48.78% with tramadol (p = 0.122). Flupirtine caused 4 adverse events compared to 16 with tramadol. However, both the drugs were well-tolerated.Conclusions: The effectiveness of flupirtine in knee OA is comparable to tramadol, while causing minimal adverse effects. Long-term benefits need to be explored.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document