Mohammad A Yabroudi, Ahmad Aldardour, Zakariya H Nawasreh, Sakher M Obaidat, Ibrahim M Altubasi, Khaldoon Bashaireh
{"title":"脉冲电磁场与渐进阻力运动相结合对膝关节骨关节炎的影响:随机对照试验","authors":"Mohammad A Yabroudi, Ahmad Aldardour, Zakariya H Nawasreh, Sakher M Obaidat, Ibrahim M Altubasi, Khaldoon Bashaireh","doi":"10.3233/BMR-220261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling disease among the elderly population. The optimal conservative treatment for knee OA is not well established.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) combined with progressive resistance exercise (PRE) in improving physical function and pain in patients with knee OA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-four patients with knee OA (17 in each group) participated in a single-blind randomized control study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 24 sessions of either combined PEMF and PRE (treatment group) or PRE only (control group). Patients were evaluated at pre-treatment, post-treatment (2 months), and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); walking speed and 5-times chair stand test. Mixed ANOVA was used for statistical analysis with Bonferroni adjustments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant group-by-time interaction for any outcome (P> 0.05). However, both groups scored significantly higher on the NPRS and KOOS at post-treatment, 3-, and 6-month follow-up compared to their baseline. Further, both groups completed the 5-times chair stand test and walking speed test with significantly less time at all post-treatment time points than the pre-treatment. None of the study outcomes (NPRS, KOOS, walking speed, and 5 times chair stand) were significantly different between groups at any of the time points.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both treatment options, PRE only versus PRE with PEMF, were equally effective in decreasing pain and improving physical function in patients with knee OA. This would suggest that the optimal parameters for PEMF that may show beneficial effects for knee OA when added to PRE training need to be determined.</p>","PeriodicalId":15129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of the combination of pulsed electromagnetic field with progressive resistance exercise on knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammad A Yabroudi, Ahmad Aldardour, Zakariya H Nawasreh, Sakher M Obaidat, Ibrahim M Altubasi, Khaldoon Bashaireh\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/BMR-220261\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling disease among the elderly population. The optimal conservative treatment for knee OA is not well established.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) combined with progressive resistance exercise (PRE) in improving physical function and pain in patients with knee OA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-four patients with knee OA (17 in each group) participated in a single-blind randomized control study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 24 sessions of either combined PEMF and PRE (treatment group) or PRE only (control group). Patients were evaluated at pre-treatment, post-treatment (2 months), and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); walking speed and 5-times chair stand test. Mixed ANOVA was used for statistical analysis with Bonferroni adjustments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant group-by-time interaction for any outcome (P> 0.05). However, both groups scored significantly higher on the NPRS and KOOS at post-treatment, 3-, and 6-month follow-up compared to their baseline. Further, both groups completed the 5-times chair stand test and walking speed test with significantly less time at all post-treatment time points than the pre-treatment. None of the study outcomes (NPRS, KOOS, walking speed, and 5 times chair stand) were significantly different between groups at any of the time points.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both treatment options, PRE only versus PRE with PEMF, were equally effective in decreasing pain and improving physical function in patients with knee OA. This would suggest that the optimal parameters for PEMF that may show beneficial effects for knee OA when added to PRE training need to be determined.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-220261\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-220261","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:膝关节骨关节炎(OA)是老年人群中一种常见的致残性疾病。膝关节 OA 的最佳保守治疗方法尚未明确:本研究旨在评估脉冲电磁场(PEMF)与渐进阻力运动(PRE)相结合对改善膝关节 OA 患者身体功能和疼痛的效果:34 名膝关节 OA 患者(每组 17 人)参加了单盲随机对照研究。患者被随机分配接受 24 次 PEMF 和 PRE 联合治疗(治疗组)或仅接受 PRE 治疗(对照组)。在治疗前、治疗后(2 个月)、3 个月和 6 个月的随访中,使用膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分表 (KOOS)、数字疼痛评分表 (NPRS)、行走速度和 5 次椅子站立测试对患者进行评估。统计分析采用混合方差分析,并进行了 Bonferroni 调整:结果:任何结果都不存在明显的组间时间交互作用(P> 0.05)。然而,与基线相比,两组患者在治疗后、3 个月和 6 个月随访时的 NPRS 和 KOOS 分数都明显较高。此外,两组患者在治疗后所有时间点完成 5 次椅子站立测试和步行速度测试的时间都明显少于治疗前。研究结果(NPRS、KOOS、行走速度和 5 次椅子站立)在任何时间点上都没有明显的组间差异:结论:两种治疗方案(仅 PRE 和 PRE 加 PEMF)在减轻膝关节 OA 患者疼痛和改善其身体功能方面效果相同。这表明,需要确定在 PRE 训练中添加 PEMF 的最佳参数,以便对膝关节 OA 产生有益影响。
Effects of the combination of pulsed electromagnetic field with progressive resistance exercise on knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial.
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling disease among the elderly population. The optimal conservative treatment for knee OA is not well established.
Objective: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) combined with progressive resistance exercise (PRE) in improving physical function and pain in patients with knee OA.
Methods: Thirty-four patients with knee OA (17 in each group) participated in a single-blind randomized control study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 24 sessions of either combined PEMF and PRE (treatment group) or PRE only (control group). Patients were evaluated at pre-treatment, post-treatment (2 months), and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); walking speed and 5-times chair stand test. Mixed ANOVA was used for statistical analysis with Bonferroni adjustments.
Results: There was no significant group-by-time interaction for any outcome (P> 0.05). However, both groups scored significantly higher on the NPRS and KOOS at post-treatment, 3-, and 6-month follow-up compared to their baseline. Further, both groups completed the 5-times chair stand test and walking speed test with significantly less time at all post-treatment time points than the pre-treatment. None of the study outcomes (NPRS, KOOS, walking speed, and 5 times chair stand) were significantly different between groups at any of the time points.
Conclusion: Both treatment options, PRE only versus PRE with PEMF, were equally effective in decreasing pain and improving physical function in patients with knee OA. This would suggest that the optimal parameters for PEMF that may show beneficial effects for knee OA when added to PRE training need to be determined.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation is a journal whose main focus is to present relevant information about the interdisciplinary approach to musculoskeletal rehabilitation for clinicians who treat patients with back and musculoskeletal pain complaints. It will provide readers with both 1) a general fund of knowledge on the assessment and management of specific problems and 2) new information considered to be state-of-the-art in the field. The intended audience is multidisciplinary as well as multi-specialty.
In each issue clinicians can find information which they can use in their patient setting the very next day.