臭氧(O2-O3)与富血小板血浆(PRP)治疗膝关节骨关节炎的中期疗效比较:一项随机平行对照试验

M. E. Fernández-Cuadros, O. Pérez-Moro, M. Albaladejo-Florín, Beatriz Entrambasaguas-Estepa, S. Álava-Rabasa
{"title":"臭氧(O2-O3)与富血小板血浆(PRP)治疗膝关节骨关节炎的中期疗效比较:一项随机平行对照试验","authors":"M. E. Fernández-Cuadros, O. Pérez-Moro, M. Albaladejo-Florín, Beatriz Entrambasaguas-Estepa, S. Álava-Rabasa","doi":"10.5812/MEJRH.74140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: A randomized parallel controlled trial was designed to compare efficacy of ozone (O 2 -O 3 ) against platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as intra-articular infiltrations in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Methods: Tertiary-level outpatient rehabilitation service. Subjects: Fifty-four patients with knee OA grades 2 a - 4 a according to Kellgren-Lawrencescalewereincludedafterobtaininganinformedconsent. Thetargetsamplesizewas27patientspergroup. Inter-vention: Patientsreceivedfourozone(interventiongroup)orthreeplatelet-richplasma(controlgroup)intra-articularinfiltrations at a one-week interval. Outcome measures: Patients were clinically and functionally evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS pain) and by Western Ontario and Mac Master index for osteoarthritis (WOMAC) at baseline and at two months follow-up. Pain, stiffness, function, and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated outcome variables. Results: Overall,27patientswererandomlyallocatedtotheinterventiongroup(ozone)and27tothecontrolgroup(PRP).Improve-mentinpain,function,andQoLwereobservedinbothgroupswithoutastatisticaldifference(P> 0.05). Stiffnessimprovementwas significant between similar and different treatment groups (P < 0.05). No side-effects were observed in either group. Conclusions: Ozone (O 2 -O 3 ) is as effective as PRP in the management of knee OA. Both interventions improved pain, function, and QoL with no statistical difference between them.","PeriodicalId":36354,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mid-Term Effectiveness of Ozone (O2-O3) Compared to Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the Management of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Parallel Controlled Trial\",\"authors\":\"M. E. Fernández-Cuadros, O. Pérez-Moro, M. Albaladejo-Florín, Beatriz Entrambasaguas-Estepa, S. Álava-Rabasa\",\"doi\":\"10.5812/MEJRH.74140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: A randomized parallel controlled trial was designed to compare efficacy of ozone (O 2 -O 3 ) against platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as intra-articular infiltrations in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Methods: Tertiary-level outpatient rehabilitation service. Subjects: Fifty-four patients with knee OA grades 2 a - 4 a according to Kellgren-Lawrencescalewereincludedafterobtaininganinformedconsent. Thetargetsamplesizewas27patientspergroup. Inter-vention: Patientsreceivedfourozone(interventiongroup)orthreeplatelet-richplasma(controlgroup)intra-articularinfiltrations at a one-week interval. Outcome measures: Patients were clinically and functionally evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS pain) and by Western Ontario and Mac Master index for osteoarthritis (WOMAC) at baseline and at two months follow-up. Pain, stiffness, function, and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated outcome variables. Results: Overall,27patientswererandomlyallocatedtotheinterventiongroup(ozone)and27tothecontrolgroup(PRP).Improve-mentinpain,function,andQoLwereobservedinbothgroupswithoutastatisticaldifference(P> 0.05). Stiffnessimprovementwas significant between similar and different treatment groups (P < 0.05). No side-effects were observed in either group. Conclusions: Ozone (O 2 -O 3 ) is as effective as PRP in the management of knee OA. Both interventions improved pain, function, and QoL with no statistical difference between them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5812/MEJRH.74140\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Journal of Rehabilitation and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/MEJRH.74140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:设计了一项随机平行对照试验,比较臭氧(O2-O3)与富含血小板血浆(PRP)在膝骨关节炎(OA)患者关节内的渗透效率。方法:三级门诊康复服务。受试者:根据凯尔格伦定律,54名膝关节骨性关节炎2 a-4 a级患者包括在获得知情同意后。目标样本量为每组27名患者。干预:患者每隔一周接受一次臭氧(干预组)或富血浆三氟哌甲酯(对照组)关节内渗透。结果测量:在基线和两个月的随访中,通过视觉模拟量表(VAS疼痛)、西安大略和Mac骨关节炎Master指数(WOMAC)对患者进行临床和功能评估。疼痛、疲劳、功能和生活质量(QoL)是评估结果变量。结果:27例患者随机分为干预组(臭氧组)和对照组(PRP)。两组患者的记忆力、功能和生活质量均有改善,但无统计学差异(P>0.05)。相似和不同治疗组的疗效有显著改善(P<0.05)。两组均未观察到副作用。结论:臭氧(O2-O3)在膝关节骨性关节炎的治疗中与PRP一样有效。两种干预措施都改善了疼痛、功能和生活质量,但没有统计学差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mid-Term Effectiveness of Ozone (O2-O3) Compared to Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the Management of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Parallel Controlled Trial
Objectives: A randomized parallel controlled trial was designed to compare efficacy of ozone (O 2 -O 3 ) against platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as intra-articular infiltrations in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Methods: Tertiary-level outpatient rehabilitation service. Subjects: Fifty-four patients with knee OA grades 2 a - 4 a according to Kellgren-Lawrencescalewereincludedafterobtaininganinformedconsent. Thetargetsamplesizewas27patientspergroup. Inter-vention: Patientsreceivedfourozone(interventiongroup)orthreeplatelet-richplasma(controlgroup)intra-articularinfiltrations at a one-week interval. Outcome measures: Patients were clinically and functionally evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS pain) and by Western Ontario and Mac Master index for osteoarthritis (WOMAC) at baseline and at two months follow-up. Pain, stiffness, function, and quality of life (QoL) were evaluated outcome variables. Results: Overall,27patientswererandomlyallocatedtotheinterventiongroup(ozone)and27tothecontrolgroup(PRP).Improve-mentinpain,function,andQoLwereobservedinbothgroupswithoutastatisticaldifference(P> 0.05). Stiffnessimprovementwas significant between similar and different treatment groups (P < 0.05). No side-effects were observed in either group. Conclusions: Ozone (O 2 -O 3 ) is as effective as PRP in the management of knee OA. Both interventions improved pain, function, and QoL with no statistical difference between them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊最新文献
Long COVID Effects on Level of Physical Activity and Health-Related Quality of Life in the Post-Infection Period: A Cross-Sectional Study Structural Equation Model for Nursing’s Spiritual Commitment, Religious Adaptation, and Their Relationship to Quality of Life and Burnout Developing a Structural Model of Reading Comprehension for Third, Fourth, and Fifth-Grade Students in Persian Language Schools of Tehran Based on the Perfetti Theoretical Framework Persian Handwriting Assessment Tool: Reliability in Students with Specific Learning Disorders Effectiveness of DIR/Floor Time Play Therapy in Social Skills and Emotion Regulation of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1