Efficacy of Intensive Acupuncture Versus Sham Acupuncture in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Questo studio è stato identificato come potenzialmente ad alto impatto.
La metrica High Impact di OE, guidata dall'AI, stima l'influenza che un articolo potrebbe avere integrando i segnali della rivista in cui è stato pubblicato e il contenuto scientifico dell'articolo stesso.
Sviluppato utilizzando un'elaborazione del linguaggio naturale all'avanguardia, il modello High Impact di OE prevede in modo più accurato la futura performance citazionale di uno studio rispetto al solo fattore di impatto della rivista.
Ciò consente di riconoscere prima le ricerche clinicamente significative e aiuta i lettori a concentrarsi sugli articoli che hanno maggiori probabilità di influenzare la pratica futura.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2021;9(7):21 Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021 Mar;73(3): 448-458.Riassunto dello studio
Four hundred and eighty patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis (OA) were randomized to receive electroacupuncture (EA; n=160) or manual acupuncture (MA; n=160) or sham (n=160) for a total of 8 weeks, 3 times/week. The primary outcome of interest was the response rate which consisted of patients improving at least 2 points on the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain and 6 points on the WOMAC function subscale. Secondary outcomes of interest included the following: NRS pain at weeks 4, 16, and 26; WOMAC function at weeks 4, 16, and 26; WOMAC pain; WOMAC stiffness; quality of life using the 12-item Short Form (SF-12) health survey (i.e., mental health and physical health); incidence of paracetamol; and patient’s global assessment (PGA). WOMAC stiffness, SF-12 , and PGA scores were measured at 4, 8, 16, and 26 weeks follow-up. Also, incidence of adverse events were reported. Results revealed that the response rate, at 8 weeks, was statistically significantly higher in the EA compared to sham (n=0.023) but this was not observed when comparing MA to sham (n=0.051). Furthermore, the response rate at 4, 16, and 26 weeks follow-up was statistically significantly favored in the EA vs sham group but this was observed for MA vs sham only at weeks 16 and 26 (p<0.05). The total incidence of adverse events included 18, 22, and 17 patients in the EA, MA, and sham groups, respectively. NRS scores were statistically significantly improved in the EA vs Sham and MA vs sham groups for all timepoints. WOMAC function and pain were statistically significantly improved in the EA vs sham for all timepoints; yet, for WOMAC function, MA vs sham was only statistically significantly improved at 16 weeks follow-up (p<0.05). For WOMAC pain, a statistical significant improvement in scores was observed for weeks 8,16, and 26 (p<0.05). Moreover, WOMAC stiffness did not statistically significantly differ in MA vs sham groups for all timepoints, but EA vs sham was statistically improved at weeks 8 and 26 (p<0.05). For SF-12 physical health, a statistical significant improvement for EA and MA when compared to sham were observed only at 16 weeks follow-up (p=0.009 for EA vs sham; p=0.026 for MA vs sham). Finally, SF-12 mental health scores statistically significantly favored the EA compared to sham group only at week 26 (p=0.01) whereas MA was favored at both weeks 16 and 26 compared to sham (p=0.024; p=0.001, respectively). Finally, 4, 2 and 10 patients were observed to use paracetamol in the EA, MA, and sham groups, respectively.
Sblocca il Rapporto ACE completo
Ha accesso a 4 altri articoli GRATUITI questo mese.
Clicchi qui sotto per sbloccare e visualizzare questo ACE Reports
Sblocca ora
Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, comprese le collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, le interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e le tavole rotonde sulle novità e gli argomenti ortopedici
Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Accesso esclusivo ad articoli di contenuto originale, tra cui revisioni sistematiche interne, e articoli sui metodi di ricerca sanitaria e su argomenti ortopedici scottanti.
Oppure faccia l'upgrade oggi stesso e acceda a tutti i contenuti di OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99$ a settimana.
Ha già un account? Effettui il login
È affiliato ad una delle nostre associazioni partner?
Clicchi qui per ottenere l'accesso gratuito tra i vantaggi dei membri della sua associazione!
Si abboni a "L'Impulso"
Ortopedia basata sull'evidenza direttamente nella sua casella di posta elettronica. ABBONARSI