Comparison of 10.6 μm Laser Moxibustion with Traditional Moxibustion in Knee Osteoarthritic Therapy: A Randomized Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

IF 1.4
Jing Fang, Zouqin Huang, Xiangyun Wang, Lusheng Chen, Ke Cheng, Haiping Deng, Lin Lin, Ling Zhao, Xueyong Shen
{"title":"Comparison of 10.6 μm Laser Moxibustion with Traditional Moxibustion in Knee Osteoarthritic Therapy: A Randomized Noninferiority Clinical Trial.","authors":"Jing Fang,&nbsp;Zouqin Huang,&nbsp;Xiangyun Wang,&nbsp;Lusheng Chen,&nbsp;Ke Cheng,&nbsp;Haiping Deng,&nbsp;Lin Lin,&nbsp;Ling Zhao,&nbsp;Xueyong Shen","doi":"10.1089/photob.2021.0030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> To investigate the noninferiority of 10.6 μm laser moxibustion (LM) to traditional moxibustion (TM) in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Ninety-two patients were recruited and randomly placed into one of two groups: 10.6 μm LM or TM in a 1:1 ratio. Each patient received 12 sessions of LM or TM, focusing on the ST-35 and Ashi acupoint. The sessions took place over 4 weeks, three times a week, and were followed up over 8 weeks. The endpoint outcomes were separated into two categories, primary and secondary. The primary endpoint was assessed at the end of the 4-week treatment, using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score. The secondary endpoint was evaluated at the end of the trial and consisted of the WOMAC function and stiffness score, visual analog pain [visual analog scale (VAS)] score, and 15-m walking time test. In addition, safety evaluation was performed throughout the trial. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Among the 92 randomized participants, 86 (93.48%) completed the trial; 43 in each group. The WOMAC pain score improved dramatically between the LM and TM groups, with a mean difference of 20.61 [95% confidence interval (CI): -2.28 to 43.50]. Given that the lower boundary of 95% CI was greater than -18.49, noninferiority was established. In addition, both LM and TM significantly decreased the WOMAC (pain, function and stiffness) score, VAS score (<i>p</i> < 0.05), and the 15-m walking time at the end of the trial. Interestingly, there were not significant differences between LM and TM (<i>p</i> > 0.05), suggesting that both are equally effective in treating KOA. Finally, among the 92 patients, 17 (18.48%) adverse effects were documented, namely 5 (10.87%) in the LM-treated group and 11 (26.09%) in the TM-treated group. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> 10.6 μm LM is not inferior to TM in treating KOA. Moreover, both LM and TM dramatically alleviated knee pain and enhanced function of knees. Clinical Trial Registration number: ISRCTN registry trial identifier: 14604492.</p>","PeriodicalId":20111,"journal":{"name":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","volume":"39 7","pages":"492-498"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/photob.2021.0030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the noninferiority of 10.6 μm laser moxibustion (LM) to traditional moxibustion (TM) in knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods: Ninety-two patients were recruited and randomly placed into one of two groups: 10.6 μm LM or TM in a 1:1 ratio. Each patient received 12 sessions of LM or TM, focusing on the ST-35 and Ashi acupoint. The sessions took place over 4 weeks, three times a week, and were followed up over 8 weeks. The endpoint outcomes were separated into two categories, primary and secondary. The primary endpoint was assessed at the end of the 4-week treatment, using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score. The secondary endpoint was evaluated at the end of the trial and consisted of the WOMAC function and stiffness score, visual analog pain [visual analog scale (VAS)] score, and 15-m walking time test. In addition, safety evaluation was performed throughout the trial. Results: Among the 92 randomized participants, 86 (93.48%) completed the trial; 43 in each group. The WOMAC pain score improved dramatically between the LM and TM groups, with a mean difference of 20.61 [95% confidence interval (CI): -2.28 to 43.50]. Given that the lower boundary of 95% CI was greater than -18.49, noninferiority was established. In addition, both LM and TM significantly decreased the WOMAC (pain, function and stiffness) score, VAS score (p < 0.05), and the 15-m walking time at the end of the trial. Interestingly, there were not significant differences between LM and TM (p > 0.05), suggesting that both are equally effective in treating KOA. Finally, among the 92 patients, 17 (18.48%) adverse effects were documented, namely 5 (10.87%) in the LM-treated group and 11 (26.09%) in the TM-treated group. Conclusions: 10.6 μm LM is not inferior to TM in treating KOA. Moreover, both LM and TM dramatically alleviated knee pain and enhanced function of knees. Clinical Trial Registration number: ISRCTN registry trial identifier: 14604492.

10.6 μm激光艾灸与传统艾灸治疗膝关节骨关节炎的比较:一项随机非劣效性临床试验。
目的:探讨10.6 μm激光灸(LM)治疗膝骨关节炎(KOA)与传统灸(TM)的非劣效性。方法:招募92例患者,按1:1的比例随机分为10.6 μm LM组和TM组。每个患者接受12次LM或TM治疗,重点治疗ST-35和Ashi穴。疗程持续4周,每周三次,随访时间超过8周。终点结果分为主要和次要两类。主要终点在4周治疗结束时进行评估,使用西安大略省和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)疼痛评分。次要终点在试验结束时进行评估,包括WOMAC功能和僵硬评分、视觉模拟疼痛[视觉模拟量表(VAS)]评分和15米步行时间测试。此外,在整个试验过程中进行了安全性评估。结果:92例随机受试者中,86例(93.48%)完成试验;每组43人。LM组和TM组的WOMAC疼痛评分显著改善,平均差异为20.61[95%可信区间(CI): -2.28至43.50]。鉴于95% CI下限大于-18.49,建立非劣效性。此外,LM和TM均显著降低了WOMAC(疼痛、功能和僵硬)评分和VAS评分(p p > 0.05),提示两者治疗KOA的效果相同。92例患者中,记录不良反应17例(18.48%),其中lm组5例(10.87%),tm组11例(26.09%)。结论:10.6 μm LM治疗KOA的疗效不逊于TM。此外,LM和TM均能显著缓解膝关节疼痛,增强膝关节功能。临床试验注册号:ISRCTN注册试验标识符:14604492。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书