Rezasoltani Zahra, Azizi Sirous, Najafi Sharif, Sanati Ehsan, Dadarkhah Afsaneh, Abdorrazaghi Fateme
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Aja University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Int J Rehabil Res. 2020 Sep;43(3):219-227. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000411.
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of four treatments in the management of knee osteoarthritis. We carried out a randomized clinical trial with four study arms in an outpatient Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at a University Hospital. In total, 120 patients with knee osteoarthritis ≥50 years of age were randomly allocated to four groups. The primary outcome was knee pain in visual analog scale and the secondary outcome was the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. The exercise was prescribed daily for all participants throughout the study. For physical therapy (group 1), participants received superficial heat, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and pulsed ultrasound. We administered a single intra-articular injection of botulinum neurotoxin type A (group 2) and three injections of hyaluronic acid (group 3) or 20% dextrose (group 4) to patients in the corresponding groups. Mixed analysis of variance showed that there was statistically significant difference between the groups in pain (P < 0.001), and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (P < 0.001). Pairwise between- and within-group comparisons showed that botulinum neurotoxin and dextrose prolotherapy were the most, and hyaluronic acid was the least efficient treatments for controlling pain and recovering function in patients. An intra-articular injection of botulinum toxin type A or dextrose prolotherapy is effective first-line treatments. In the next place stands physical therapy particularly if the patient is not willing to continue regular exercise programs. Our study was not very supportive of intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid as an effective treatment of knee osteoarthritis.
本研究旨在比较四种治疗方法在膝关节骨关节炎管理中的疗效。我们在一所大学医院的物理医学与康复门诊进行了一项有四个研究组的随机临床试验。总共120名年龄≥50岁的膝关节骨关节炎患者被随机分配到四组。主要结局指标是视觉模拟量表中的膝关节疼痛,次要结局指标是膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分。在整个研究过程中,为所有参与者规定了每日锻炼。对于物理治疗组(第1组),参与者接受浅表热疗、经皮电神经刺激和脉冲超声治疗。我们为相应组的患者单次关节内注射A型肉毒杆菌神经毒素(第2组)、三次注射透明质酸(第3组)或20%葡萄糖(第4组)。方差混合分析表明,各组在疼痛方面(P<0.001)以及膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分方面(P<0.001)存在统计学显著差异。组间和组内的两两比较表明,肉毒杆菌神经毒素和葡萄糖增殖疗法对控制患者疼痛和恢复功能最为有效,而透明质酸的效果最差。关节内注射A型肉毒杆菌毒素或葡萄糖增殖疗法是有效的一线治疗方法。其次是物理治疗,尤其是在患者不愿意继续进行常规锻炼计划的情况下。我们的研究不太支持关节内注射透明质酸作为膝关节骨关节炎的有效治疗方法。