| Literature DB >> 24069060 |
Lizhen Wang1, Fan Wu, Ling Zhao, Haimeng Zhang, Xueyong Shen, Yi Huang, Lixing Lao.
Abstract
Knee osteoarthritis (OA) manifests with pain, joint stiffness, and limited function. In traditional Chinese medicine, knee OA is differentiated into three patterns: yang deficiency and cold coagulation, kidney deficiency, and blood stasis. The objective of this study was to determine whether yang deficiency cold coagulation patients respond better to thermal laser acupuncture treatment than do non-yang deficient patients. Fifty-two patients with OA were allocated to group A (yang deficient, n = 26) or B (non-yang deficient, n = 26). All patients received a 20-min thermal laser acupuncture treatment at acupoint Dubi (ST 35) three times a week for two weeks and twice a week for another four weeks. Outcome assessments were performed immediately after the first treatment, and at weeks 2, 6, and 10. Group A function scores were significantly better than those of Group B at weeks 2 (P = 0.049), 6 (P = 0.046), and 10 (P = 0.042), but no significant differences were found between the two groups in pain and stiffness scores at any time point. No significant adverse effect was observed. The combined 10.6 μ m-650 nm laser treatment might be most beneficial to yang deficiency cold coagulation knee OA patients, particularly in improving function.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24069060 PMCID: PMC3771475 DOI: 10.1155/2013/870305
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1(a) Laser treatment was performed bilaterally. (b) Laser tips were placed at acupuncture point ST35 (Dubi).
Figure 2Flow chart of patient recruitment.
Baseline patient characteristics.
| Group A. | Group B. No | |
|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |
| Age (years) | 62.36 | 63.04 |
| Gender (F/M) | 20/5 | 14/12* |
| Affected knees (bilateral/single) | 16/9 | 18/8 |
| Durations (year) | 8.08 | 7.46 |
*P < 0.05. There was no difference at baseline in group characteristics except for gender. There were more female patients in Group A.
WOMAC score changes from baseline (Group A and Group B combined, n = 51).
| Pain | Stiffness | Function | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 95% CI | 95% CI | 95% CI | |
| First treatment | −4.98 [−9.38, −0.58]* | −4.27 [−9.34,0.79] | −2.12 [−5.63,1.39] |
| wk 2 | −14.57 [−19.45, −9.70]** | −15.79 [−22.77, −8.82]** | −9.65 [−14.17, −5.12]** |
| wk 6 | −15.29 [−20.63, −9.94]** | −17.76 [−24.04, −11.48]** | −11.75 [−16.61, −6.89]** |
| wk 10 | −17.63 [−23.01, −12.25]** | −19.48 [−25.88, −13.08]** | −13.60 [−18.38, −8.81]** |
*P value < 0.05 compared to baseline.
**P value < 0.001 compared to baseline.
Percentage changes in WOMAC score values from baseline (mean ± SD) [(baseline − posttreatment)/baseline × 100%].
| Group A (diff %) | Group B (diff %) |
| Total (diff %) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pain | Initial treatment | 8.98 ± 42.46 | −3.07 ± 70.3 | 0.443 | 2.6 ± 58.1 |
| Week 2 | 37.72 ± 36.32 | 32.57 ± 40.63 | 0.634 | 35.09 ± 38.28 | |
| Week 6 | 50.28 ± 35.55 | 30.3 ± 55.59 | 0.132 | 40.10 ± 47.47 | |
| Week 10 | 51.25 ± 40.24 | 42.45 ± 54.95 | 0.516 | 46.76 ± 48.03 | |
|
| |||||
| Stiffness | Initial treatment | −75.7 ± 358.31 | −30.67 ± 110.22 | 0.552 | −54.71 ± 260.86 |
| Week 2 | −2.44 ± 125.39 | −9.13 ± 136.97 | 0.856 | −6.01 ± 130.02 | |
| Week 6 | 30.01 ± 74.74 | 22 ± 67.94 | 0.691 | 25.11 ± 70.42 | |
| Week 10 | 40.29 ± 55.50 | 18.59 ± 111.20 | 0.381 | 27.13 ± 89.36 | |
|
| |||||
| Function | Initial treatment | 10.93 ± 33.68* | −21.5 ± 73.00 |
| −5.60 ± 58.96 |
| Week 2 | 36.18 ± 29.74* | 12.25 ± 50.85 |
| 23.98 ± 43.16 | |
| Week 6 | 47.67 ± 29.67* | 24.15 ± 48.32 |
| 35.68 ± 41.61 | |
| Week 10 | 51.52 ± 34.66 | 33.15 ± 42.71 | 0.098 | 42.15 ± 39.68 | |
*P value < 0.05 compared to Group B.
Influence of TCM pattern on WOMAC score improvement rate from baseline using multivariate regression analysis controlling confounding.
| Pain/TCM | Stiffness/TCM | Function/TCM | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | SE |
| Coefficient | SE |
| Coefficient | SE |
| |
| 1st treatment | −0.134 | 0.169 | 0.432 | 0.115 | 0.791 | 0.885 | −0.296 | 0.17 | 0.089 |
| wk 2 | −0.131 | 0.102 | 0.205 | −0.28 | 0.401 | 0.488 | −0.27 | 0.118 | 0.027* |
| wk 6 | −0.257 | 0.132 | 0.057 | −0.171 | 0.216 | 0.432 | −0.293 | 0.111 | 0.012* |
| wk 10 | −0.15 | 0.139 | 0.288 | −0.408 | 0.260 | 0.123 | −0.265 | 0.108 | 0.019* |
*P < 0.05 indicates a positive correlation between the yang deficiency cold coagulation pattern and treatment effect.
Sample sizes for rationales of different effect sizes (Δ) and ρ.
|
| Δ (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50% | 60% | 70% | 80% | |
| 0.5 | 34 | 24 | 18 | 14 |
| 0.6 | 40 | 28 | 21 | 16 |
| 0.7 | 46 | 32 | 23 | 18 |
| 0.8 | 51 | 36 |
| 20 |
| 0.9 | 57 | 40 | 29 | 23 |