ACE Report Cover
AAOS2018: No difference between prolotherapy and sham saline in Osgood-Schlatter treatment
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Language
Download Download Download
Download
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Cite
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favorites
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Language
Download Download Download
Download
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Cite
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favorites
PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS
AAOS2018: No difference between prolotherapy and sham saline in Osgood-Schlatter treatment .

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2018;6(9):10

38 adolescents with 50 knees affected by Osgood-Schlatter disease were randomized to three monthly treatments of either prolotherapy with a dextrose solution, or so sham prolotherapy with saline. Patients were assessed for function on the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment (VISA) score after 1, 2 and 3 months. Results demonstrated no significant differences between groups at 1, 2, or 3 months, with a significant increase in scores from baseline for both groups.


Conference Report

This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.

Why was this study needed now?

Osgood-Schlatter disease involves pain and swelling over the tibial tubercle in adolescents, particularly among those involved in sporting activities. Prolotherapy has been investigated for efficacy in various musculoskeletal ailments, though not in the setting of Osgood-Schlatter disease.

What was the principal research question?

In the treatment of adolescents with Osgood-Schlatter disease, how does efficacy and safety of prolotherapy with dextrose compare to sham prolotherapy with saline, assessed over 3 months of treatment?

Study Characteristics +
Population:
A total of 50 knees in 38 adolescents with Osgood-Schlatter disease, and previously failed conservative management with physiotherapy and pharmacotherapy.
Intervention:
Prolotherapy group: Patients were allocated to monthly sessions of ultrasound-guided prolotherapy for 3 months. Prolotherapy was completed using a solution of 1mL 20% dextrose and 1mL 1% lidocaine. (n=25 knees; Mean age: 12.4+/-0.9).
Comparison:
Saline group: Patients were allocated to monthly sessions of ultrasound-guided sham prolotherapy for 3 months. Therapy was completed using a solution of 1mL saline and 1mL 1% lidocaine. (n=24 knees; Mean age: 12.4+/-1.2)
Outcomes:
Outcome was the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment (VISA) score.
Methods:
RCT
Time:
Patients were assessed at 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months after the first injection.
What were the important findings?
  • VISA scores did not significantly differ between the prolotherapy group and the sham group at either 1 month (76.9+/-20.4 vs. 72.6+/-22.2; p=0.508), 2 months (73.3+/-26.8 vs. 74.6+/-26.7; p=0.874), or 3 months (85.7+/-18.7 vs. 83.2+/-19.8; p=0.658).
  • The degree of improvement from baseline after 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months was significant in each group.
What should I remember most?

In the treatment of adolescents with Osgood-Schlatter disease, prolotherapy for 3 months with a dextrose solution demonstrated no significant difference in functional outcome when compared to sham prolotherapy.

How will this affect the care of my patients?

The results of this study suggest that prolotherapy with a dextrose solution may demonstrate no clinical advantage over saline for functional improvement in the management of adolescents with Osgood-Schlatter disease.

DISCLAIMER

This content found on this page is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. If you require medical treatment, always seek the advice of your physician or go to your nearest emergency department. The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the individuals on the content found on this page do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of OrthoEvidence.

0 of 4 monthly FREE articles unlocked
You've reached your limit of 4 free articles views this month

Access to OrthoEvidence for as little as $1.99 per week.

Stay connected with latest evidence. Cancel at any time.
  • Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
  • Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
  • Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Upgrade
Welcome Back!
Forgot Password?
Start your FREE trial today!

Your account will be affiliated with
and includes free access to OrthoEvidence


OR
Forgot Password?

OR
Please check your email

If an account exists with the provided email address, a password reset email will be sent to you. If you don't see an email, please check your spam or junk folder.

For further assistance, contact our support team.

Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Translate ACE Report

OrthoEvidence utilizes a third-party translation service to make content accessible in multiple languages. Please note that while every effort is made to ensure accuracy, translations may not always be perfect.

How to cite this ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. AAOS2018: No difference between prolotherapy and sham saline in Osgood-Schlatter treatment. OE Journal. 2018;6(9):10. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/aaos2018-no-difference-between-prolotherapy-and-sham-saline-in-osgood-schlatter-treatment

Copy Citation
Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Premium Member Feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into a premium OrthoEvidence account.

Share this ACE Report