Segal N A, Toda Y, Huston J, Saeki Y, Shimizu M, Fuchs H, Shimaoka Y, Holcomb R, McLean M J
Vanderbilt University Medical School, Nashville, TN 37232, USA.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Oct;82(10):1453-60. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.24309.
To assess the efficacy of a nonpharmacologic, noninvasive static magnetic device as adjunctive therapy for knee pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Randomized, double-blind, controlled, multisite clinical trial.
An American and a Japanese academic medical center as well as 4 community rheumatology and orthopedics practices.
Cohort of 64 patients over age 18 years with rheumatoid arthritis and persistent knee pain, rated greater than 40/100mm, despite appropriate use of medications.
Four blinded MagnaBloc (with 4 steep field gradients) or control devices (with 1 steep field gradient) were taped to a knee of each subject for 1 week.
The American College of Rheumatology recommended core set of disease activity measures for RA clinical trials and subjects' assessment of treatment outcome.
Subjects randomly assigned to the MagnaBloc (n = 38) and control treatment groups (n = 26) reported baseline pain levels of 63/100mm and 61/100mm, respectively. A greater reduction in reported pain in the MagnaBloc group was sustained through the 1-week follow-up (40.4% vs 25.9%) and corroborated by twice daily pain diary results (p < .0001 for each vs baseline). However, comparison between the 2 groups demonstrated a statistically insignificant difference (p < .23). Subjects in the MagnaBloc group reported an average decrease in their global assessment of disease activity of 33% over 1 week, as compared with a 2% decline in the control group (p < .01). After 1 week, 68% of the MagnaBloc treatment group reported feeling better or much better, compared with 27% of the control group, and 29% and 65%, respectively, reported feeling the same as before treatment (p < .01).
Both devices demonstrated statistically significant pain reduction in comparison to baseline, with concordance across multiple indices. However, a significant difference was not observed between the 2 treatment groups (p < .23). In future studies, the MagnaBloc treatment should be compared with a nonmagnetic placebo treatment to characterize further its therapeutic potential for treating RA. This study did elucidate methods for conducting clinical trials with magnetic devices.
评估一种非药物、非侵入性的静态磁疗设备作为类风湿关节炎(RA)患者膝关节疼痛辅助治疗的疗效。
随机、双盲、对照、多中心临床试验。
一家美国学术医学中心、一家日本学术医学中心以及4家社区风湿病和骨科诊所。
64名年龄在18岁以上的类风湿关节炎患者队列,尽管已适当用药,但仍存在持续膝关节疼痛,疼痛评分大于40/100mm。
将4个盲法磁块(有4个陡峭场梯度)或对照设备(有1个陡峭场梯度)分别贴在每位受试者的一个膝盖上,持续1周。
美国风湿病学会推荐的用于RA临床试验的疾病活动核心指标集以及受试者对治疗结果的评估。
随机分配到磁块组(n = 38)和对照组(n = 26)的受试者报告的基线疼痛水平分别为63/100mm和61/100mm。在为期1周的随访中,磁块组报告的疼痛减轻更为显著(40.4%对25.9%),每日两次的疼痛日记结果也证实了这一点(与基线相比,每组p < .0001)。然而,两组之间的比较显示差异无统计学意义(p < .23)。磁块组受试者报告其疾病活动整体评估在1周内平均下降了33%,而对照组下降了2%(p < .01)。1周后,磁块治疗组68%的受试者报告感觉好转或明显好转,而对照组为27%,分别有29%和65%的受试者报告感觉与治疗前相同(p < .01)。
与基线相比,两种设备均显示出统计学上显著的疼痛减轻,多个指标结果一致。然而,两个治疗组之间未观察到显著差异(p < .23)。在未来的研究中,应将磁块治疗与非磁性安慰剂治疗进行比较,以进一步明确其治疗RA的潜力。本研究确实阐明了使用磁疗设备进行临床试验的方法。