23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Periosteal Electrical Dry Needling as an Adjunct to Exercise and Manual Therapy for Knee Osteoarthritis : A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article
      , DPT, MSc, FAAOMPT * , , , , DPT, MSc, PhD , , , DSc, PT, Dip Osteopractic , § , , PT, OMT, Dip Osteopractic * , , , DPT, FAAOMPT , , DPT, FAAOMPT # , , DPT, FAAOMPT ** , , DMSc, PT, PhD *
      The Clinical Journal of Pain
      Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
      knee osteoarthritis, dry needling, manual therapy, exercise, clinical trial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives:

          To compare the effects of adding electrical dry needling into a manual therapy (MT) and exercise program on pain, stiffness, function, and disability in individuals with painful knee osteoarthritis (OA).

          Materials and Methods:

          In total, 242 participants (n=242) with painful knee OA were randomized to receive 6 weeks of electrical dry needling, MT, and exercise (n=121) or MT and exercise (n=121). The primary outcome was related-disability as assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index at 3 months.

          Results:

          Individuals receiving the combination of electrical dry needling, MT, and exercise experienced significantly greater improvements in related-disability (WOMAC: F=35.504; P<0.001) than those receiving MT and exercise alone at 6 weeks and 3 months. Patients receiving electrical dry needling were 1.7 times more likely to have completely stopped taking medication for their pain at 3 months than individuals receiving MT and exercise (OR, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.01; P=0.001). On the basis of the cutoff score of ≥5 on the global rating of change, significantly (χ 2=14.887; P<0.001) more patients (n=91, 75%) within the dry needling group achieved a successful outcome compared with the MT and exercise group (n=22, 18%) at 3 months. Effect sizes were large (standardized mean differences >0.82) for all outcome measures in favor of the electrical dry needling group at 3 months.

          Discussion:

          The inclusion of electrical dry needling into a MT and exercise program was more effective for improving pain, function, and related-disability than the application of MT and exercise alone in individuals with painful knee OA.

          Level of Evidence:

          Level 1b—therapy. Prospectively registered February 10, 2015 on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02373631).

          Related collections

          Most cited references83

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference.

          In recent years quality of life instruments have been featured as primary outcomes in many randomized trials. One of the challenges facing the investigator using such measures is determining the significance of any differences observed, and communicating that significance to clinicians who will be applying the trial results. We have developed an approach to elucidating the significance of changes in score in quality of life instruments by comparing them to global ratings of change. Using this approach we have established a plausible range within which the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) falls. In three studies in which instruments measuring dyspnea, fatigue, and emotional function in patients with chronic heart and lung disease were applied the MCID was represented by mean change in score of approximately 0.5 per item, when responses were presented on a seven point Likert scale. Furthermore, we have established ranges for changes in questionnaire scores that correspond to moderate and large changes in the domains of interest. This information will be useful in interpreting questionnaire scores, both in individuals and in groups of patients participating in controlled trials, and in the planning of new trials.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, Part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines.

            To develop concise, patient-focussed, up to date, evidence-based, expert consensus recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), which are adaptable and designed to assist physicians and allied health care professionals in general and specialist practise throughout the world. Sixteen experts from four medical disciplines (primary care, rheumatology, orthopaedics and evidence-based medicine), two continents and six countries (USA, UK, France, Netherlands, Sweden and Canada) formed the guidelines development team. A systematic review of existing guidelines for the management of hip and knee OA published between 1945 and January 2006 was undertaken using the validated appraisal of guidelines research and evaluation (AGREE) instrument. A core set of management modalities was generated based on the agreement between guidelines. Evidence before 2002 was based on a systematic review conducted by European League Against Rheumatism and evidence after 2002 was updated using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Library and HTA reports. The quality of evidence was evaluated, and where possible, effect size (ES), number needed to treat, relative risk or odds ratio and cost per quality-adjusted life years gained were estimated. Consensus recommendations were produced following a Delphi exercise and the strength of recommendation (SOR) for propositions relating to each modality was determined using a visual analogue scale. Twenty-three treatment guidelines for the management of hip and knee OA were identified from the literature search, including six opinion-based, five evidence-based and 12 based on both expert opinion and research evidence. Twenty out of 51 treatment modalities addressed by these guidelines were universally recommended. ES for pain relief varied from treatment to treatment. Overall there was no statistically significant difference between non-pharmacological therapies [0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16, 0.34] and pharmacological therapies (ES=0.39, 95% CI 0.31, 0.47). Following feedback from Osteoarthritis Research International members on the draft guidelines and six Delphi rounds consensus was reached on 25 carefully worded recommendations. Optimal management of patients with OA hip or knee requires a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological modalities of therapy. Recommendations cover the use of 12 non-pharmacological modalities: education and self-management, regular telephone contact, referral to a physical therapist, aerobic, muscle strengthening and water-based exercises, weight reduction, walking aids, knee braces, footwear and insoles, thermal modalities, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and acupuncture. Eight recommendations cover pharmacological modalities of treatment including acetaminophen, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) non-selective and selective oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), topical NSAIDs and capsaicin, intra-articular injections of corticosteroids and hyaluronates, glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulphate for symptom relief; glucosamine sulphate, chondroitin sulphate and diacerein for possible structure-modifying effects and the use of opioid analgesics for the treatment of refractory pain. There are recommendations covering five surgical modalities: total joint replacements, unicompartmental knee replacement, osteotomy and joint preserving surgical procedures; joint lavage and arthroscopic debridement in knee OA, and joint fusion as a salvage procedure when joint replacement had failed. Strengths of recommendation and 95% CIs are provided. Twenty-five carefully worded recommendations have been generated based on a critical appraisal of existing guidelines, a systematic review of research evidence and the consensus opinions of an international, multidisciplinary group of experts. The recommendations may be adapted for use in different countries or regions according to the availability of treatment modalities and SOR for each modality of therapy. These recommendations will be revised regularly following systematic review of new research evidence as this becomes available.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study.

              To estimate the global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study and to explore how the burden of hip and knee OA compares with other conditions. Systematic reviews were conducted to source age-specific and sex-specific epidemiological data for hip and knee OA prevalence, incidence and mortality risk. The prevalence and incidence of symptomatic, radiographic and self-reported hip or knee OA were included. Three levels of severity were defined to derive disability weights (DWs) and severity distribution (proportion with mild, moderate and severe OA). The prevalence by country and region was multiplied by the severity distribution and the appropriate disability weight to calculate years of life lived with disability (YLDs). As there are no deaths directly attributed to OA, YLDs equate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Globally, of the 291 conditions, hip and knee OA was ranked as the 11th highest contributor to global disability and 38th highest in DALYs. The global age-standardised prevalence of knee OA was 3.8% (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 3.6% to 4.1%) and hip OA was 0.85% (95% UI 0.74% to 1.02%), with no discernible change from 1990 to 2010. Prevalence was higher in females than males. YLDs for hip and knee OA increased from 10.5 million in 1990 (0.42% of total DALYs) to 17.1 million in 2010 (0.69% of total DALYs). Hip and knee OA is one of the leading causes of global disability. Methodological issues within this study make it highly likely that the real burden of OA has been underestimated. With the aging and increasing obesity of the world's population, health professions need to prepare for a large increase in the demand for health services to treat hip and knee OA. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clin J Pain
                Clin J Pain
                AJP
                The Clinical Journal of Pain
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
                0749-8047
                1536-5409
                December 2018
                04 June 2018
                : 34
                : 12
                : 1149-1158
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, University King Juan Carlos, Alcorcón, Spain
                []American Academy of Manipulative Therapy Fellowship in Orthopaedic Manual Physical Therapy, Montgomery, AL
                []Research Physical Therapy Specialists, Columbia, SC
                [§ ]CORA Physical Therapy, Savannah, GA
                [** ]Benchmark Physical Therapy, Atlanta, GA
                []STI Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Phoenix, AZ
                [# ]Orthopedic Rehab Specialists, Rockford, IL
                []Department of Physiotherapy, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy
                Author notes
                Reprints: James Dunning, DPT, MSc, FAAOMPT, 1036 Old Breckenridge Ln Montgomery, AL 36117 (e-mail: j.dunning.2016@ 123456alumnos.urjc.es ).
                Article
                00009
                10.1097/AJP.0000000000000634
                6250299
                29864043
                fb367bdc-7b53-42d7-8be5-a56ac21df8f0
                Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                : 30 March 2018
                : 21 May 2018
                : 22 May 2018
                Categories
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                knee osteoarthritis,dry needling,manual therapy,exercise,clinical trial

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content83

                Cited by17

                Most referenced authors1,115