Briggs-Price Samuel, Mills George, Houchen-Wolloff Linzy, Daynes Enya, Gerlis Charlotte, Latimer Lorna E, Esler Colin, Targett Darren, Singh Sally J
Centre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre - Respiratory, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2025 Apr 5;7(2):100607. doi: 10.1016/j.ocarto.2025.100607. eCollection 2025 Jun.
To explore the effectiveness of a NMES device in improving pain and function for individuals with KOA.
This was a randomised, sham-controlled, superiority trial recruiting individuals with symptomatic KOA, with both participants and outcome assessors blinded to the treatment allocation. Participants were randomised to receive either self-administered NMES, consisting of quadriceps (5 times a week) and footplate stimulation (7 times a week), or a sham device for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain domain at week 8.
179 participants were randomised; 50.8 % female, mean (SD) age 66.9 (8.7) years. 164 attended the follow up visit. No difference in the WOMAC pain domain was seen between groups (-0.7; 95 % CI: -1.5, 0.1; P = 0.10), though within group improvements were reported in both groups (NMES: -1.5; 95 % CI: -2.0, 0.8; P < 0.01, sham: -0.8; 95 % CI: -1.4, 0.2; P < 0.01). There were no differences in strength, exercise and functional capacity, swelling, health related quality of life or anxiety and depression between groups. Sub-group analysis for NMES compliance or recruitment source did not change response in primary outcome.
Use of an NMES device on the quadriceps and plantar flexors did not enhance pain relief or improve function over the sham control in people with KOA.
探讨神经肌肉电刺激（NMES）设备对改善膝骨关节炎（KOA）患者疼痛和功能的有效性。
这是一项随机、假对照、优效性试验，招募有症状的KOA患者，参与者和结果评估者均对治疗分配不知情。参与者被随机分配接受自我管理的NMES，包括股四头肌刺激（每周5次）和足板刺激（每周7次），或假设备，为期8周。主要结局是第8周时西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数（WOMAC）疼痛领域的变化。
179名参与者被随机分组；50.8%为女性，平均（标准差）年龄66.9（8.7）岁。164人参加了随访。两组之间在WOMAC疼痛领域未见差异（-0.7；95%置信区间：-1.5，0.1；P = 0.10），尽管两组均报告了组内改善情况（NMES组：-1.5；95%置信区间：-2.0，0.8；P < 0.01，假设备组：-0.8；95%置信区间：-1.4，0.2；P < 0.01）。两组在力量、运动和功能能力、肿胀、健康相关生活质量或焦虑和抑郁方面均无差异。NMES依从性或招募来源的亚组分析未改变主要结局的反应。
对于KOA患者，在股四头肌和跖屈肌上使用NMES设备与假对照相比，并未增强疼痛缓解或改善功能。
Zotero 插件
