| Literature DB >> 35572837 |
Abstract
Objective: To explore the effect of a moxibustion instrument combined with intermediate frequency electrostatic therapy on pain and joint function in elderly patients with cold-dampness arthritis (KOA). Method: 200 patients with cold-dampness KOA treated in our hospital from May 2019 to September 2021 were selected. According to the random number table method, they were divided into the observation group (n = 100) and control group (n = 100). The observation group was treated with moxibustion combined with medium-frequency treatment, and the control group was treated with medium-frequency treatment. The clinical effects of the two groups were compared. The joint functions of the two groups were evaluated by the visualization scale of the osteoarthritis index (WOMAC index) of McMaster University in Western Ontario. The TCM symptom scores of the two groups were evaluated according to the guiding principles for clinical research of new traditional Chinese medicine. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the pain degree of the two groups, and the microcirculatory blood perfusion (MBPU) and interleukin-1 were compared between the two groups, β (IL-1β) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α). The levels of matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1), serum bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2), cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP), and serum type II collagen C-terminal peptide (CTX-II) were assessed by the comprehensive quality of life questionnaire-74. Result: The total effective rate of the observation group (92.00%) was higher than that of the control group (76.00%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05) in β and TNF-α. The levels of MMP-3, BMP-2, comp, and CTX-II and the improvement of quality of life score in the control group were better than those in the control group (P < 0.05).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35572837 PMCID: PMC9098269 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2613901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.809
Comparison of the general information between the two groups.
| Groups | Observation group ( | Control group ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male/female) ( | 44/56 | 48/52 | 0.911 |
| Age (years old) | 72.00 ± 6.00 | 70.78 ± 6.16 | 0.736 |
| Course (years) | 2.76 ± 1.48 | 2.82 ± 1.53 | 0.750 |
| Unilateral disease/bilateral disease ( | 37/63 | 43/57 | 0.059 |
| X-ray grade (I/II/III) | 33/43/34 | 30/37/33 | 0.176 |
Comparison of the clinical efficacy between the two groups (case (%)).
| Groups | Clinical recovery | Excellence | Effective | Invalid | Total effective |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation group ( | 33 (33.00) | 45 (45.00) | 14 (14.00) | 8 (8.00) | 92 (92.00) |
| Control group ( | 11 (11.00) | 33 (33.00) | 32 (32.00) | 24 (24.00) | 76 (76.00) |
|
| 9.524 | ||||
|
| 0.002 |
Comparison of WOMAC scores between two groups (x ± s, points).
| Groups | Pain score | Joint stiffness score | Daily activity score | Aggregate score | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | |
| Observation group ( | 10.79 + 1.42 | 4.29 + 1.47a | 6.05 + 1.08 | 1.38 + 0.79a | 51.02 + 5.47 | 22.26 + 2.13a | 67.89 + 5.96 | 27.93 + 2.60a |
| Control group ( | 10.97 + 1.32 | 6.78 + 1.61a | 5.91 + 1.02 | 2.64 + 1.42a | 50.28 + 5.06 | 30.43 + 3.51a | 67.16 + 4.94 | 39.85 + 4.17a |
|
| 0.927 | 11.455 | 0.946 | 7.766 | 0.993 | 19.894 | 0.904 | 24.234 |
|
| 0.355 | <0.001 | 0.345 | <0.001 | 0.322 | <0.001 | 0.367 | <0.001 |
Note: compared with the same group before treatment, aP < 0.05.
Comparison of TCM credits (x ± s, points).
| Groups | Knee pain | Heavy pain in the waist | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | |
| Observation group ( | 3.74 + 0.79 | 1.20 + 0.98a | 1.73 + 0.53 | 0.48 + 0.50a |
| Control group ( | 3.78 + 0.69 | 1.76 + 0.65a | 1.82 + 0.66 | 0.74 + 0.58a |
|
| 0.382 | 4.739 | 1.067 | 3.391 |
|
| 0.703 | <0.001 | 0.287 | 0.001 |
Note: compared with the same group before treatment, aP < 0.05.
Comparison of pain and blood flow perfusion in the two groups (x ± s).
| Groups | VAS score (score) | MBPU | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | |
| Observation group ( | 6.33 + 1.40 | 1.77 + 0.84a | 12.48 + 1.26 | 7.42 + 1.65a |
| Control group ( | 6.39 + 1.32 | 3.68 + 1.29a | 12.24 + 1.11 | 8.71 + 1.44a |
|
| 0.311 | 12.438 | 1.421 | 5.911 |
|
| 0.756 | <0.001 | 0.157 | <0.001 |
Note: compared with the same group before treatment, aP < 0.05.
Comparison of inflammatory levels between the two groups (x ± s).
| Groups | IL-1 | TNF- | MMP-1 (ng/l) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | |
| Observation group ( | 5.36 + 1.19 | 1.08 + 0.23a | 8.32 + 2.15 | 2.22 + 0.91a | 359.33 + 35.43 | 89.21 + 8.04a |
| Control group ( | 5.50 + 0.91 | 3.49 + 0.57a | 8.49 + 2.18 | 4.06 + 1.15a | 361.65 + 36.73 | 168.31 + 16.34a |
|
| 0.952 | 39.494 | 0.553 | 12.620 | 0.455 | 43.440 |
|
| 0.342 | <0.001 | 0.581 | <0.001 | 0.650 | <0.001 |
Note: compared with the same group before treatment, aP < 0.05.
Comparison of BMP-2, COMP, and CTX-II levels between the two groups (x ± s).
| Groups | BMP-2 (ng/ml) | COMP (U/l) | CTX-II ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | |
| Observation group ( | 1.86 + 0.45 | 0.79 + 0.17a | 13.39 + 3.38 | 8.17 + 2.28a | 581.63 + 58.17 | 440.54 + 37.35a |
| Control group ( | 1.88 + 0.31 | 1.42 + 0.30a | 13.95 + 3.29 | 9.78 + 2.74a | 579.66 + 47.53 | 492.66 + 50.00a |
|
| 0.233 | 18.016 | 1.205 | 4.528 | 0.262 | 8.351 |
|
| 0.816 | <0.001 | 0.230 | <0.001 | 0.794 | <0.001 |
Note: compared with the same group before treatment, aP < 0.05.
Comparison of quality of life between two groups (x ± s, score).
| Groups | Somatic function | Mental function | Social function | Material life function | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | Prior treatment | Posttreatment | |
| Observation group ( | 45.82 + 3.12 | 71.60 + 6.35a | 46.22 + 3.67 | 73.38 + 6.33a | 46.01 + 4.02 | 67.90 + 6.57a | 50.73 + 6.08 | 71.01 + 8.52a |
| Control group ( | 45.46 + 4.40 | 59.31 + 4.71a | 47.04 + 4.46 | 58.08 + 4.61a | 46.34 + 4.41 | 58.86 + 4.82a | 49.60 + 6.22 | 62.00 + 6.04a |
|
| 0.668 | 15.541 | 1.419 | 19.525 | 0.554 | 11.091 | 1.299 | 8.628 |
|
| 0.505 | <0.001 | 0.157 | <0.001 | 0.580 | <0.001 | 0.196 | <0.001 |
Note: compared with the same group before treatment, aP < 0.05.