OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy on knee osteoarthritis (KOA) at the early and middle stage between electroacupuncture (EA) and meloxicam. METHODS:Ninety patients of KOA at the early and middle stage were randomized into an EA group and a meloxicam group, 45 cases in each one. In the EA group, EA was applied to Dubi (ST 35), Neixiyan (EX-LE 4), Liangqiu (ST 34), Heding (EX-LE 2), Xuehai (SP 10), Yan- glingquan (GB 34) and Zusanli (ST 36); the needles were retained for 20 min and EA was applied once every two days. In the meloxicam group, the meloxicam tablets were prescribed for oral administration, 7. 5 mg, once a day. The treatment lasted for 6 weeks in the two groups. The Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, rectus femoris muscle tension, the 8-foot walking test and 5-time sit-to-stand test were adopted to observe and compare the effects in the two groups. RESULTS: After treatment, every item score in WOMAC was reduced after treatment (all P < 0.05), but the difference was not significant between the two groups (all P > 0.05). In the EA group, the rectus femoris tension after treatment was reduced as compared with that before treatment (P < 0.05) and the reducing result was much more apparent as compared with that in the meloxicam group (P < 0.05). For the 8-foot walking test and 5-time sit-to-stand test, the time was shortened after treatment in the two groups (all P < 0.05) and the result in the EA group was much more obvious than that in the meloxicam group (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both EA and meloxicam are effective in the treatment of KOA at the early and middle stage. EA improves rectus femoris tension and recovers the internal mechanics balance and the efficacy is better than that of meloxicam.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy on knee osteoarthritis (KOA) at the early and middle stage between electroacupuncture (EA) and meloxicam. METHODS: Ninety patients of KOA at the early and middle stage were randomized into an EA group and a meloxicam group, 45 cases in each one. In the EA group, EA was applied to Dubi (ST 35), Neixiyan (EX-LE 4), Liangqiu (ST 34), Heding (EX-LE 2), Xuehai (SP 10), Yan- glingquan (GB 34) and Zusanli (ST 36); the needles were retained for 20 min and EA was applied once every two days. In the meloxicam group, the meloxicam tablets were prescribed for oral administration, 7. 5 mg, once a day. The treatment lasted for 6 weeks in the two groups. The Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, rectus femoris muscle tension, the 8-foot walking test and 5-time sit-to-stand test were adopted to observe and compare the effects in the two groups. RESULTS: After treatment, every item score in WOMAC was reduced after treatment (all P < 0.05), but the difference was not significant between the two groups (all P > 0.05). In the EA group, the rectus femoris tension after treatment was reduced as compared with that before treatment (P < 0.05) and the reducing result was much more apparent as compared with that in the meloxicam group (P < 0.05). For the 8-foot walking test and 5-time sit-to-stand test, the time was shortened after treatment in the two groups (all P < 0.05) and the result in the EA group was much more obvious than that in the meloxicam group (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both EA and meloxicam are effective in the treatment of KOA at the early and middle stage. EA improves rectus femoris tension and recovers the internal mechanics balance and the efficacy is better than that of meloxicam.