Efficacy of methylsulfonylmethane supplementation on osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: Patients with osteoarthritis (OA) take a variety of health supplements in an attempt to reduce pain and improve function. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) in treating patients with knee OA. METHODS: This study was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial. Forty nine men and women 45-90 (mean 68 ± SD 7.3) years of age with knee OA according to the American College of Rheumatology clinical criteria for OA of the knee and with radiographic confirmed knee OA were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned into 2 groups: One received MSM in doses of 1.125 grams 3 times daily for 12 weeks and the other received a placebo in the same dosing frequency. The primary outcomes were the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index for pain, stiffness and physical function, the Aggregated Locomotor Function (ALF) test that evaluates each patient's physical function, the SF-36 quality of life health survey and the visual-analogue-scale (VAS) for pain. The secondary outcomes were Knee Society Clinical Rating System for Knee Score (KSKS) and Function Score (KSFS). Patients were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks and 12 weeks. All continuous variables were tested by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for Normal distribution. Changes within the groups and differences between the groups were calculated by repeated measures of analysis (ANOVA) with one nested variable. RESULTS: There were significant differences between treatment groups over time in WOMAC physical function (14.6 mm [CI: 4.3, 25.0]; p = 0.04) and in WOMAC total score (15.0 mm [CI: 5.1, 24.9]; p = 0.03). Treatment groups did not differ significantly in WOMAC pain (12.4 mm [CI: 0.0, 24.8]); p = 0.08) or WOMAC stiffness (27.2 mm [CI: 8.2, 46.2]; p = 0.08). There was a non-significant difference in SF-36 total score between treatment groups (11.6 [CI: 1.0, 22.1]; p = 0.54). A significant difference was found between groups in VAS for pain (0.7 s [CI: -0.9, 2.4]; p = 0.05). Secondary outcomes showed non-significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OA of the knee taking MSM for 12 weeks showed an improvement in pain and physical function. These improvements, however, are small and it is yet to be determined if they are of clinical significance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0118821

Correlation between single limb support phase and self-evaluation questionnaires in knee osteoarthritis populations

Purpose. To investigate the correlation between single limb support (SLS) phase (% of gait cycle) and the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire and Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36 Health Survey) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA)

A treatment applying a biomechanical device to the feet of patients with knee osteoarthritis results in reduced pain and improved function: a prospective controlled study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study examined the effect of treatment with a novel biomechanical device on the level of pain and function in patients with knee OA.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with bilateral knee OA were enrolled to active and control groups. Patients were evaluated at baseline, at 4 weeks and at the 8-week endpoint. A novel biomechanical device was individually calibrated to patients from the active group. Patients from the control group received an identical foot-worn platform without the biomechanical elements. Primary outcomes were the WOMAC Index and ALF assessments.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no baseline differences between the groups. At 8 weeks, the active group showed a mean improvement of 64.8% on the WOMAC pain scale, a mean improvement of 62.7% on the WOMAC function scale, and a mean improvement of 31.4% on the ALF scale. The control group demonstrated no improvement in the above parameters. Significant differences were found between the active and control groups in all the parameters of assessment.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The biomechanical device and treatment methodology is effective in significantly reducing pain and improving function in knee OA patients.</p> <p>The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT00457132, <url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00457132?order=1</url></p

Differences in gait patterns, pain, function and quality of life between males and females with knee osteoarthritis: a clinical trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the gender differences in knee osteoarthritis (OA) by evaluating the differences in gait spatio-temporal parameters and the differences in pain, quality of life and function between males and females suffering from knee OA.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>49 males and 85 females suffering from bilateral medial compartment knee OA participated in this study. Each patient underwent a computerized gait test and completed the WOMAC questionnaire and the SF-36 health survey. Independent t-tests were performed to examine the differences between males and females in age, BMI, spatio-temporal parameters, the WOMAC questionnaire and the SF-36 health survey.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Males and females had different gait patterns. Although males and females walked at the same walking speed, cadence and step length, they presented significant differences in the gait cycle phases. Males walked with a smaller stance and double limb support, and with a larger swing and single limb support compared to females. In addition, males walked with a greater toe out angle compared to females. While significant differences were not found in the WOMAC subscales, females consistently reported higher levels of pain and disability.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The spatio-temporal differences between genders may suggest underlying differences in the gait strategies adopted by males and females in order to reduce pain and cope with the loads acting on their affected joints, two key aspects of knee OA. These gender effects should therefore be taken into consideration when evaluating patients with knee OA.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>The study is registered in the NIH clinical trial registration, protocol No. NCT00599729.</p