Interferential current and photobiomodulation in knee osteoarthritis: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial

A systematic review and network meta-analysis on the optimal wavelength of low-level light therapy (LLLT) in treating knee osteoarthritis symptoms

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of the various wavelengths of low-level light therapy (LLLT) in alleviating knee pain, dysfunction, and stiffness in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and to compare the effectiveness of LLLT versus sham treatment in reducing knee pain, dysfunction, and stiffness.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 12 December 2023. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of different wavelengths of LLLT on alleviating pain of patients with KOA were included. A conventional meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were preformed, and standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 673 participants with KOA met inclusion criteria. Overall, LLLT was superior to sham LLLT for relieving pain (SMD = 0.96, 95% CI 0.31-1.61) but not for improving function (SMD = 0.21, 95% CI - 0.11 to 0.53) or stiffness (SMD = 0.07, 95% CI - 0.25 to 0.39). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value ranking showed the most effective wavelength of LLLT in reducing KOA pain was 904-905 nm (SUCRA, 86.90%), followed by multi-wavelengths (MWL) (SUCRA, 56.43%) and 785-850 nm (SUCRA, 54.97%). Compared to sham LLLT, L2 (SMD = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.31-2.53) and L1 (SMD = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.11-1.50) showed a significant reduction in KOA pain. However, MWL (SMD = 0.83; 95% CI = - 0.06 to 1.72) showed similar KOA pain reduction compared to sham LLLT. The certainty of evidence showed that the quality of evidence regarding the effectiveness of overall LLLT versus sham, and 904-905 nm versus sham were low, while the quality of evidence for MWL versus sham, and 785-850 nm versus sham was very low.

CONCLUSION

While the 904-905 nm wavelength showed potential benefits in reducing KOA pain, the overall quality of the evidence was low. LLLT with 904-905 nm or 785-850 nm wavelengths yielded significantly better reduction in KOA pain compared to sham LLLT, but further high-quality research is warranted to validate these findings.

Stair-Climbing Training with Interferential Electrotherapy Improves Knee Muscle Strength, Dynamic Postural Stability, Pain Score, and Physical Activity in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

Background/Objective: This study aimed to compare the functional outcomes, such as knee muscle strength, dynamic postural stability, pain scores, and physical activity, in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) on stair climbing training with and without interferential electrotherapy (IFE) for 12 weeks. Methods: A total of 40 knee OA patients with Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade ≤ 2 were enrolled (20 stair-climbing training with IFE vs. 20 stair-climbing training without IFE). The knee quadriceps and hamstring muscle strengths were measured using an isokinetic device. The dynamic postural stability was assessed using postural stabilometry. The pain score was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS). Physical activity was assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Results: The WOMAC score was significantly different (p < 0.019) between stair-climbing training with and without IFE in patients with knee OA, while knee muscle strength, dynamic postural stability, or pain score were not (all p > 0.05). Conclusion: Stair-climbing training with IFE was more beneficial for physical activity recovery than stair-climbing training without IFE. Therefore, clinicians and therapists should be aware that stair climbing, which can be practiced in daily life for the management of patients with knee OA, and the addition of IFE may improve physical activity.

The effect of high-intensity laser therapy on pain and lower extremity function in patellofemoral pain syndrome: a single-blind randomized controlled trial

Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) is a set of symptoms that negatively affect the daily life activities of the individual, leading to functional disability and significant loss of labor, especially in young adults. PFPS is usually due to weakness of the vastus medialis obliquus (VMO) resulting in abnormal patellar tracking and pain. Our study aims to compare the efficacy of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) on pain and lower extremity function in the treatment of PFPS with different electrophysical agents (EPAs). The study was designed as a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Forty-five people with PFPS (aged 25-45 years) were included in the study. The patients were randomly divided into three groups and a total of ten sessions of treatment were administered to all three groups for 2 weeks, 5 days a week. High-intensity laser (HILT) and exercise program were applied to group 1. Ultrasound (US), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), and exercise program were applied to group 2. In group 3, US, interferential current (IFC), and exercise program were applied. Both groups underwent three evaluations: pre-treatment, post-treatment, and 12 weeks after treatment. Outcome measures included the visual analog scale for pain severity (VAS), knee flexion range of motion (FROM), Q angle, pain threshold, muscle strength of quadriceps and hamstring, Kujala patellofemoral scoring, lower extremity functional scale (LEFS), and Timed Up and Go Test (TUG). The ANOVA was used for comparing the data of the groups, and two-way repeated measure ANOVA was used to compare at the pre-post and post-intervention 3rd month. The LSD and Bonferroni post hoc tests were also used to identify the between-group differences. Groups 2 and 3 were statistically effective in pain and functionality (p < 0.05). Group 1 was found to be statistically more effective than other groups in reducing pain (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.000/0.000; p = 0.000), increasing knee flexion angle (95% CI, 127.524/135.809; p = 0.000), and increasing lower extremity function (95% CI, 75.970/79.362; p = 0.000). This study indicated that high-intensity laser therapy was found to be a more effective method in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome after 3 months of follow-up compared to US-TENS combination and US-interferential current combination treatments. Also, HILT can be used as an effective method in combination with an appropriate exercise program including vastus medialis strengthening to reduce pain and increase functionality in the patients with PFPS.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2022: rehabilitation

This year in review presents key highlights from research relating to osteoarthritis (OA) rehabilitation published from the 1^st April 2021 to the 18^th March 2022. To identify studies for inclusion in the review, an electronic database search was carried out in Medline, Embase and CINAHLplus. Following screening, included studies were grouped according to their predominant topic area, including core OA rehabilitation treatments (education, exercise, weight loss), adjunctive treatments, novel and emerging treatments or research methods, and translation of rehabilitation evidence into practice. Studies of perceived high clinical importance, quality, or controversy in the field were selected for inclusion in the review. Headline findings include: the positive role of technology to support remote delivery of core OA rehabilitation treatments, the importance of delivering educational interventions alongside exercise, the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a stepped approach to exercise, controversy around the potential mechanisms of action of exercise, mixed findings regarding the use of splinting for thumb base OA, increasing research on blood flow restriction training as a potential new intervention for OA, and evidence that the beneficial effects from core OA treatments seen in randomised controlled trials can be seen when implemented in clinical practice. A consistent finding across several recently published systematic reviews is that randomised controlled trials testing OA rehabilitation interventions are often small, with some risk of bias. Whilst future research is warranted, it needs to be large scale and robust, to enable definitive answers to important remaining questions in the field of OA rehabilitation.

CDC Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain - United States, 2022

This guideline provides recommendations for clinicians providing pain care, including those prescribing opioids, for outpatients aged ≥18 years. It updates the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain - United States, 2016 (MMWR Recomm Rep 2016;65[No. RR-1]:1-49) and includes recommendations for managing acute (duration of <1 month), subacute (duration of 1-3 months), and chronic (duration of >3 months) pain. The recommendations do not apply to pain related to sickle cell disease or cancer or to patients receiving palliative or end-of-life care. The guideline addresses the following four areas: 1) determining whether or not to initiate opioids for pain, 2) selecting opioids and determining opioid dosages, 3) deciding duration of initial opioid prescription and conducting follow-up, and 4) assessing risk and addressing potential harms of opioid use. CDC developed the guideline using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Recommendations are based on systematic reviews of the scientific evidence and reflect considerations of benefits and harms, patient and clinician values and preferences, and resource allocation. CDC obtained input from the Board of Scientific Counselors of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (a federally chartered advisory committee), the public, and peer reviewers. CDC recommends that persons with pain receive appropriate pain treatment, with careful consideration of the benefits and risks of all treatment options in the context of the patient's circumstances. Recommendations should not be applied as inflexible standards of care across patient populations. This clinical practice guideline is intended to improve communication between clinicians and patients about the benefits and risks of pain treatments, including opioid therapy; improve the effectiveness and safety of pain treatment; mitigate pain; improve function and quality of life for patients with pain; and reduce risks associated with opioid pain therapy, including opioid use disorder, overdose, and death.

Effectiveness of interferential current therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of interferential current therapy (IFC) in patients with knee osteoarthritis. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalKey, and Scopus for relevant studies from their date of launch to March 22, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which IFC was applied to knee osteoarthritis patients and the outcomes of pain scores or functional scales were assessed. Ten RCTs with 493 patients met the inclusion criteria. Nine RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The IFC groups exhibited significant improvements relative to the control groups for short-term pain scores (SMD = - 0.64, 95% CI - 1.04 to - 0.25, P = 0.001), long-term pain scores (SMD = - 0.36, 95% CI - 0.60 to - 0.11, P = 0.005), and short-term Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores (SMD = - 0.39, 95% CI - 0.77 to - 0.02, P = 0.04). All included studies did not observe any obvious adverse effects of IFC. IFC can be recommended as a treatment for knee osteoarthritis because it improves short- and long-term pain and short-term function. However, large-scale and high-quality RCTs with longer follow-up are required to establish an appropriate standardized treatment.

[Physical therapy in the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome]

The treatment of patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) takes place in an interdisciplinary and multimodal setting. Physical therapies represent a major treatment focus along with physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and analgetic treatments. This review explains their importance in current clinical practice and gives an impression of the evidence on different treatments including electrotherapy, neuromodulating procedures, manual lymphatic drainage, CO₂ applications and paraffin wax baths. As far as ascertainable from clinical experience and the scientific literature, treatment recommendations are presented in accordance with current guidelines.