Symptom Scores and Gait Analyses on Knee Osteoarthritis by Acupotomy
B. Dong,J. Yao,P. Yuan,X. Li,G. Ou,W. Kang,D. Liu,X. Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2017.02.647
IF: 7.507
2017-01-01
Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Abstract:Purpose: Typical symptoms of knee osteoarthritis patients include knee pain and limited activities of joints. Although pain points of these patients are seemingly irregular and could be distributed anywhere on the knee,it was found that most of them are centered on the stress concentration zone of knee joints, the tendon-ligament-bone junction and the superficial fascia around knee joints. When patients suffering from arthritis for a long time or a more serious condition, the pain point can appear in some areas of muscles close to joints. These pain points often cause dysfunction of patients. With widespread access to acupotomy therapy in clinic, great relief in patients’ joint pain and improvement of joint motion have been attained. The research is mainly to observe the effect of acupotomy therapy with micro-needles on joint pain, swelling,as well as the relationship between joint activities and relevant gait changes. Methods: A total of 168 patients conforming to the diagnostic standard were randomly divided into a treatment group and a control group with 84 cases in each. The treatment group received acupotomy therapy once a week,(one treatment = 5 sessions). The Sodium hyaluronate was injected into the knee joint cavity for arthritis patients of control group once a week,5 times for a period of treatment. The score of joint pain,swelling and motion,the WOMAC grade,and the change of relevant gait analyses in biomechanics before and after treatment were recorded after patients orally taking celecoxib capsules,200 mg,once a day. The collected data was sorted out and processed by SPSS16.0 software. Results: Good effects on knee osteoarthritis have been shown in both groups:①The VAS pain score changes before and after the treatment between two groups (P < 0.05) reveal that the VAS grades in both groups before treatment are significantly different from those after treatment and it can be seen that the effect on the treatment group is superior to the control group.②The scores of joint swelling and mobility as well as WOMAC grades indicated that the clinical symptoms were improved after treatment in both groups and the results of the treatment group in reducing symptoms scores and WOMAC grades are better than those of the control group.③The score of dynamic plantar pressure time and the score proportion (%) of dynamic plantar pressure distribution for weight in the control group before and after treatment has changed significantly,the effect on the treatment group compared to that of control group was obvious. The score differences are great in both groups before and after treatment (P < 0.05),which was presented that The therapeutic effect on the treatment group is superior to that of the control group. Conclusions: Acupotomy therapy can improve the clinical symptoms of knee osteoarthritis. According to patients’gait analyses,the maximum plantar load of suffering limbs is lighter than that of normal limbs and weightbearing time of suffering limbs is shorter than that of normal limbs in mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis patients;while in patients with severe knee osteoarthritis the maximum plantar load of suffering limbs is heavier than that of normal limbs and weightbearing time of suffering limbs is longer than that of normal limbs. The proportion of plantar weightbearing scores of both feet after treatment with acupotomy therapy is less different from that before treatment,which is also showed in the control group but the changes are not that significant. The research has proven that the patients can regain mechanical balance in their legs undergoing the acupotomy therapy.Table 1The two group dynamic plantar pressure time integral change compared before and after the treatmentGroupBefore treatment of integral X2 ± SAfter treatment of integral X2 ± STPtreatment group1756 ± 26.541447 ± 26.19T = −9.072P = 0.001control group1713 ± 32.681566 ± 35.84T = −7.715P = 0.003Compared two groups of patients before and after treatment the integration,T = 7.684,P = 0.001 there are significant differences (P < 0.05),indicating that the treatment group curative effect is better than the control group. Open table in a new tab Table 2Two group before and after dynamic plantar pressure distribution weight proportion integral (%)GroupBefore treatment of integral X2 ± SAfter treatment of integral X2 ± STPtreatment group43.85 ± 1.8850.75 ± 2.19T = −4.071P = 0.001control group44.61 ± 2.3247.63 ± 1.84T = −3.746P = 0.005Two groups after treatment in patients with total integral comparison,T = 2.654,P = 0.001 there are significant differences (P < 0.05),indicating that the treatment group curative effect is better than the control group. Open table in a new tab Table 3The VAS pain score changes before and after the treatment between two groupsGroupBefore treatment of integral X2 ± SAfter treatment of integral X2 ± STPtreatment group4.82 ± 0.352.75 ± 0.19T = −1.071P = 0.001control group4.61 ± 0.324.63 ± 0.24T = −0.746P = 0.001Compared two groups of patients after treatment,T = 0.583,P = 0.001 there are significant differences (P < 0.05),indicating that the treatment group curative effect is better than the control group. Open table in a new tab Compared two groups of patients before and after treatment the integration,T = 7.684,P = 0.001 there are significant differences (P < 0.05),indicating that the treatment group curative effect is better than the control group. Two groups after treatment in patients with total integral comparison,T = 2.654,P = 0.001 there are significant differences (P < 0.05),indicating that the treatment group curative effect is better than the control group. Compared two groups of patients after treatment,T = 0.583,P = 0.001 there are significant differences (P < 0.05),indicating that the treatment group curative effect is better than the control group.