61 research outputs found

    Oral herbal therapies for treating osteoarthritis (review)

    Get PDF
    Background Medicinal plant products are used orally for treating osteoarthritis. Although their mechanisms of action have not yet been elucidated in full detail, interactions with common inflammatory mediators provide a rationale for using them to treat osteoarthritic complaints. Objectives To update a previous Cochrane review to assess the benefits and harms of oral medicinal plant products in treating osteoarthritis. Search methods We searched electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to 29 August 2013, unrestricted by language, and the reference lists from retrieved trials. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials of orally consumed herbal interventions compared with placebo or active controls in people with osteoarthritis were included. Herbal interventions included any plant preparation but excluded homeopathy or aromatherapy products, or any preparation of synthetic origin. Data collection and analysis Two authors used standard methods for trial selection and data extraction, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence using the GRADE approach for major outcomes (pain, function, radiographic joint changes, quality of life, withdrawals due to adverse events, total adverse events, and serious adverse events). Main results Forty‐nine randomised controlled studies (33 interventions, 5980 participants) were included. Seventeen studies of confirmatory design (sample and effect sizes pre‐specified) were mostly at moderate risk of bias. The remaining 32 studies of exploratory design were at higher risk of bias. Due to differing interventions, meta‐analyses were restricted to Boswellia serrata (monoherbal) and avocado‐soyabean unsaponifiables (ASU) (two herb combination) products. Five studies of three different extracts from Boswellia serrata were included. Moderate‐quality evidence from two studies (85 participants) indicated that 90 days treatment with 100 mg of enriched Boswellia serrata extract improved symptoms compared to placebo. Mean pain was 40 points on a 0 to 100 point VAS scale (0 is no pain) with placebo, enriched Boswellia serrata reduced pain by a mean of 17 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 8 to 26); number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 2; the 95% CIs did not exclude a clinically significant reduction of 15 points in pain. Physical function was 33 points on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) 0 to 100 point subscale (0 is no loss of function) with placebo, enriched Boswellia serrata improved function by 8 points (95% CI 2 to 14); NNTB 4. Assuming a minimal clinically important difference of 10 points, we cannot exclude a clinically important benefit in some people. Moderate‐quality evidence (one study, 96 participants) indicated that adverse events were probably reduced with enriched Boswellia serrata (18/48 events versus 30/48 events with placebo; relative risk (RR) 0.60, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.92). Possible benefits of other Boswellia serrata extracts over placebo were confirmed in moderate‐quality evidence from two studies (97 participants) of Boswellia serrata (enriched) 100 mg plus non‐volatile oil, and low‐quality evidence from small single studies of a 999 mg daily dose of Boswellia serrata extract and 250 mg daily dose of enrichedBoswellia serrata. It was uncertain if a 99 mg daily dose of Boswellia serrata offered benefits over valdecoxib due to the very low‐quality evidence from a small single study. It was uncertain if there was an increased risk of adverse events or withdrawals with Boswellia serrata extract due to variable reporting of results across studies. The studies reported no serious adverse events. Quality of life and radiographic joint changes were not measured. Six studies examined the ASU product Piasclidine®. Moderate‐quality evidence from four studies (651 participants) indicated that ASU 300 mg produced a small and clinically questionable improvement in symptoms, and probably no increased adverse events compared to placebo after three to 12 months treatment. Mean pain with placebo was 40.5 points on a VAS 0 to 100 scale (0 is no pain), ASU 300 mg reduced pain by a mean of 8.5 points (95% CI 1 to 16 points); NNTB 8. ASU 300 mg improved function (standardised mean difference (SMD) ‐0.42, 95% CI ‐0.73 to ‐0.11). Function was estimated as 47 mm (0 to 100 mm scale, where 0 is no loss of function) with placebo, ASU 300 mg improved function by a mean of 7 mm (95% CI 2 to 12 mm); NNTB 5 (3 to 19). There were no differences in adverse events (5 studies, 1050 participants) between ASU (53%) and placebo (51%) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12); withdrawals due to adverse events (1 study, 398 participants) between ASU (17%) and placebo (15%) (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.80); or serious adverse events (1 study, 398 participants) between ASU (40%) and placebo (33%) (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.59). Radiographic joint changes, measured as change in joint space width (JSW) in two studies (453 participants) did not differ between ASU 300 mg treatment (‐0.53 mm) and placebo (‐0.65 mm); mean difference of ‐0.12 (95% CI ‐0.43 to 0.19). Moderate‐quality evidence from a single study (156 participants) confirmed possible benefits of ASU 600 mg over placebo, with no increased adverse events. Low‐quality evidence (1 study, 357 participants) indicated there may be no differences in symptoms or adverse events between ASU 300 mg and chondroitin sulphate. Quality of life was not measured. All other herbal interventions were investigated in single studies, limiting conclusions. No serious side effects related to any plant product were reported. Authors' conclusions Evidence for the proprietary ASU product Piasclidine® in the treatment of osteoarthritis symptoms seems moderate for short term use, but studies over a longer term and against an apparently active control are less convincing. Several other medicinal plant products, including extracts of Boswellia serrata, have moderate‐quality evidence for trends of benefits that warrant further investigation in light of the fact that the risk of adverse events appear low. There is no evidence that Piasclidine® significantly improves joint structure, and limited evidence that it prevents joint space narrowing. Structural changes were not tested for with any other herbal intervention. Further investigations are required to determine optimum daily doses producing clinical benefits without adverse events

    Topical herbal therapies for treating osteoarthritis (review)

    Get PDF
    Background Before extraction and synthetic chemistry were invented, musculoskeletal complaints were treated with preparations from medicinal plants. They were either administered orally or topically. In contrast to the oral medicinal plant products, topicals act in part as counterirritants or are toxic when given orally. Objectives To update the previous Cochrane review of herbal therapy for osteoarthritis from 2000 by evaluating the evidence on effectiveness for topical medicinal plant products. Search methods Databases for mainstream and complementary medicine were searched using terms to include all forms of arthritis combined with medicinal plant products. We searched electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to February 2013, unrestricted by language. We also searched the reference lists from retrieved trials. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials of herbal interventions used topically, compared with inert (placebo) or active controls, in people with osteoarthritis were included. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed the risk of bias of included studies and extracted data. Main results Seven studies (seven different medicinal plant interventions; 785 participants) were included. Single studies (five studies, six interventions) and non‐comparable studies (two studies, one intervention) precluded pooling of results. Moderate evidence from a single study of 174 people with hand osteoarthritis indicated that treatment with Arnica extract gel probably results in similar benefits as treatment with ibuprofen (non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug) with a similar number of adverse events. Mean pain in the ibuprofen group was 44.2 points on a 100 point scale; treatment with Arnica gel reduced the pain by 4 points after three weeks: mean difference (MD) ‐3.8 points (95% confidence intervals (CI) ‐10.1 to 2.5), absolute reduction 4% (10% reduction to 3% increase). Hand function was 7.5 points on a 30 point scale in the ibuprofen‐treated group; treatment with Arnica gel reduced function by 0.4 points (MD ‐0.4, 95% CI ‐1.75 to 0.95), absolute improvement 1% (6% improvement to 3% decline)). Total adverse events were higher in the Arnica gel group (13% compared to 8% in the ibuprofen group): relative risk (RR) 1.65 (95% CI 0.72 to 3.76). Moderate quality evidence from a single trial of 99 people with knee osteoarthritis indicated that compared with placebo, Capsicum extract gel probably does not improve pain or knee function, and is commonly associated with treatment‐related adverse events including skin irritation and a burning sensation. At four weeks follow‐up, mean pain in the placebo group was 46 points on a 100 point scale; treatment with Capsicum extract reduced pain by 1 point (MD ‐1, 95% CI ‐6.8 to 4.8), absolute reduction of 1% (7% reduction to 5% increase). Mean knee function in the placebo group was 34.8 points on a 96 point scale at four weeks; treatment with Capsicum extract improved function by a mean of 2.6 points (MD ‐2.6, 95% CI ‐9.5 to 4.2), an absolute improvement of 3% (10% improvement to 4% decline). Adverse event rates were greater in the Capsicum extract group (80% compared with 20% in the placebo group, rate ratio 4.12, 95% CI 3.30 to 5.17). The number needed to treat to result in adverse events was 2 (95% CI 1 to 2). Moderate evidence from a single trial of 220 people with knee osteoarthritis suggested that comfrey extract gel probably improves pain without increasing adverse events. At three weeks, the mean pain in the placebo group was 83.5 points on a 100 point scale. Treatment with comfrey reduced pain by a mean of 41.5 points (MD ‐41.5, 95% CI ‐48 to ‐34), an absolute reduction of 42% (34% to 48% reduction). Function was not reported. Adverse events were similar: 6% (7/110) reported adverse events in the comfrey group compared with 14% (15/110) in the placebo group (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.10). Although evidence from a single trial indicated that adhesive patches containing Chinese herbal mixtures FNZG and SJG may improve pain and function, the clinical applicability of these findings are uncertain because participants were only treated and followed up for seven days. We are also uncertain if other topical herbal products (Marhame‐Mafasel compress, stinging nettle leaf) improve osteoarthritis symptoms due to the very low quality evidence from single trials. No serious side effects were reported. Authors' conclusions Although the mechanism of action of the topical medicinal plant products provides a rationale basis for their use in the treatment of osteoarthritis, the quality and quantity of current research studies of effectiveness are insufficient. Arnica gel probably improves symptoms as effectively as a gel containing non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug, but with no better (and possibly worse) adverse event profile. Comfrey extract gel probably improves pain, and Capsicum extract gel probably will not improve pain or function at the doses examined in this review. Further high quality, fully powered studies are required to confirm the trends of effectiveness identifed in studies so far

    IS MANUAL THERAPY A RATIONAL APPROACH TO IMPROVING HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PEOPLE WITH ARTHRITIS?

    Get PDF
    Background: People with arthritic disease are advised to participate in gentle exercise on a regular basis, and pursue long-term medication regimes. Alternative therapies are also used by people with arthritis, and may sometimes be recommended by rheumatologists and other medical personnel. Alternative therapies may be divided into two types: active therapies, in which the patient takes a driving role, and passive therapies, in which the therapy cannot proceed unless driven by a therapist

    Herbal therapy for treating rheumatoid arthritis (review)

    Get PDF
    Background Herbal medicine interventions have been identified as having potential benefit in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Objectives To update an existing systematic (Cochrane) review of herbal therapies in RA. Search methods We searched electronic databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, Dissertation Abstracts (1996 to 2009), unrestricted by language, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in October 2010. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials of herbal interventions compared with placebo or active controls in RA. Data collection and analysis Two authors selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Main results Twelve new studies were added to the update, a total of 22 studies were included. Evidence from seven studies indicate potential benefits of gamma linolenic acid (GLA) from evening primrose oil, borage seed oil, or blackcurrent seed oil, in terms of reduced pain intensity (mean difference (MD) ‐32.83 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐56.25 to ‐9.42,100 point pain scale); improved disability (MD ‐15.75% 95% CI ‐27.06 to ‐4.44%); and an increase in adverse events (GLA 20% versus placebo 3%), that was not statistically different (relative risk 4.24, 95% CI 0.78 to 22.99). Three studies compared Tripterygium wilfordii (thunder god vine) to placebo and one to sulfasalazine and indicated improvements in some outcomes, but data could not be pooled due to differing interventions, comparisons and outcomes. One study reported serious side effects with oral Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F. In the follow‐up studies, all side effects were mild to moderate and resolved after the intervention ceased. Two studies compared Phytodolor® N to placebo but poor reporting limited data extraction. The remaining studies each considered differing herbal interventions. Authors' conclusions Several herbal interventions are inadequately justified by single studies or non‐comparable studies in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. There is moderate evidence that oils containing GLA (evening primrose, borage, or blackcurrant seed oil) afford some benefit in relieving symptoms for RA, while evidence for Phytodolor® N is less convincing.Tripterygium wilfordii products may reduce some RA symptoms, however, oral use may be associated with several side effects. Many trials of herbal therapies are hampered by research design flaws and inadequate reporting. Further investigation of each herbal therapy is warranted, particularly via well designed, fully powered, confirmatory clinical trials that use American College of Rheumatology improvement criteria to measure outcomes and report results according to CONSORT guidelines

    Breast size, bra fit and thoracic pain in young women: a correlational study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>A single sample study was undertaken to determine the strength and direction of correlations between: a) breast size and thoracic spine or posterior chest wall pain; b) bra fit and thoracic spine or posterior chest wall pain and; c) breast size and bra fit, in thirty nulliparous women (18–26 years), with thoracic spine or posterior chest wall pain, who wore bras during daytime.</p> <p>Measures</p> <p>Pain (Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire), bra size (Triumph International), bra fit (Triumph International).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Most (80%) women wore incorrectly sized bras: 70% wore bras that were too small, 10% wore bras that were too large. Breast size was negatively correlated with both bra size (r = -0.78) and bra fit (r = -0.50). These results together indicate that large breasted women were particularly likely to be wearing incorrectly sized and fitted bras. Negligible relationships were found between pain and bra fit, and breast size and pain. Menstrual cycle stage was moderately positively correlated with bra fit (r = 0.32).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In young, nulliparous women, thoracic pain appears unrelated to breast size. Bra fit is moderately related to stage of menstrual cycle suggesting that this research may be somewhat confounded by hormonal changes or reproductive stage. Further research is needed to clarify whether there is a relationship between breast size or bra fit and thoracic pain in women during times of hormonal change.</p

    Chiropractic & Osteopathy. A new journal

    Get PDF
    Both chiropractic and osteopathy are over a century old. They are now regarded as complementary health professions. There is an imperative for both professions to research the principles and claims that underpin them, and the new journal Chiropractic & Osteopathy provides a scientific forum for the publication of such research

    The assessment partnership –assessing student readiness to practice

    Get PDF
    Assessment is a critical component of the educational paradigm. Teaching, learning and assessment need to be aligned to optimise learning outcomes (Boud, 1995), and ensure graduates are safe and competent to practice in their professions (Eva, 2007; Holmboe et al. 2010; Van der Vleuten, 1996). In this session we will present and critically evaluate the roles of the student, the University, clinical supervisor/s, and the professional body in ensuring graduates' readiness to practice. In order to maximise their learning, students need to take active roles in the learning process. We will report on research on the use of ePortfolios in which students collected and presented evidence that demonstrated their competency. Embedded in this research were students' reflections around their learning. Assessment of clinical competency in the university environment has been criticised for lacking fidelity (ie: not being real, believable, or reflecting the work environment). Clinical employers want to be assured that graduates are "work ready". We will explore several creative, innovative, evidence-based strategies to increase the fidelity of university assessments so that assessors can be more assured of students' preparedness to enter the workplace. Clinical placements offer excellent opportunities to assess students' performance in the environments in which they will eventually work. Although having greater fidelity than the university setting, significant threats to the validity of assessment remain in these environments. Particularly concerning are: variability between supervisors' judgments, and the unpredictability of clinical workplaces such that we cannot ensure that all students experience placements of the same difficulty of challenge. In this section we will present and critically evaluate a range of workplace assessments, allowing participants to consider what might work in different environments. We will further discuss ways in which assessments might be changed to manage threats to validity

    Exercise testing and intervention: translation into a low resource community

    Get PDF
    Ikageng is a low-resource community on the outskirts of Potchefstroom in the North West Province of South Africa. South Africa experiences a burden of disease that includes both diseases of lifestyle due to obesity and sedentary behaviour, and diseases of poverty due to poor sanitation and insufficient public health measures. Exercise interventions are powerful tools to modify diseases of lifestyle, and the effects of these interventions can be readily measured using structured fitness tests, clinical examination procedures, and pencil and paper tests of health and wellbeing. In Ikageng we explored the possible translation of exercise intervention and testing into a low-resource community. We undertook a series of linked studies, commending with the translation of the SF-8 into Tswana, and the test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and face validity testing of this questionnaire in the community. We bench-marked the Tswana SF-8 against the South African English version of the same. We then compared several variations of a graduated step test for the prediction of VO2 peak, comparing the individual test when completed stepping in time to a metronome against a test completed using music to hold time, and the preferred of these individual tests against the step test completed in pairs. Once we had identified the most acceptable forms of these field tests, we conducted pilot testing of these tools during a community based exercise intervention (dancing). We have been able to demonstrate that the Tswana version of the SF-8, and modified step tests, are similarly robust, valid, and as practically useful as their traditional English and laboratory based forms respectively
    corecore