scholarly journals Oral Versus Topical Ibuprofen for Chronic Knee Pain: A Prospective Randomized Pilot Study

2010 ◽  
Vol 5;13 (5;9) ◽  
pp. 457-467
Author(s):  
Sarani Tong-Ngork
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Topical Gel ◽  
Chronic Knee Pain ◽  
Oral Ibuprofen ◽  
Mean Differences

Background: Topical ibuprofen provides an alternative treatment to oral ibuprofen for the treatment of chronic knee pain. Objective: To compare the efficacy of topical versus oral ibuprofen in chronic knee pain treatment. Study Design: Prospective, randomized, unblinded pilot study. Setting: A private pain management practice. Methods: Twenty patients received either ibuprofen tablets 3 times daily (2400 mg total) or 4% topical gel 4 times daily (320 mg total) for 2 weeks. Subjects completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index, the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short Form (SF-12v2) Health Survey, and a satisfaction questionnaire. Results: Comparison of WOMAC and SF-12v2 mean changes from baseline showed no differences between groups. Patient satisfaction and study treatment convenience were rated equivalently between groups. Within the topical group, significant improvements (P < 0.05) were experienced in the mean differences of WOMAC Pain scores from baseline to 2 weeks (-82.6, -158.3 to -6.8), WOMAC Stiffness scores from baseline to one week (-25.3, -50.0 to -0.6) and baseline to 2 weeks (-47.8, -95.7 to 0.1), WOMAC Physical Function scores from baseline to one week (-175.9, -348.6 to -3.2) and baseline to 2 weeks (-312.1, -580.5 to -43.7), and patient satisfaction scores from baseline to one week and baseline to 2 weeks. Within the oral group, significant improvements (P < 0.05) were experienced in mean differences of WOMAC Physical Function from baseline to one week (-342.6, -638.1 to -47.1) and baseline to 2 weeks (-323.2, -637.1 to -9.2). Limitations: As this was a preliminary investigation, the sample size of 20 subjects is a limitation in this study. Conclusion: Treatment of chronic knee pain with topical ibuprofen provided comparable clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction as oral ibuprofen in this pilot study. Key words: Topical ibuprofen, knee osteoarthritis, chronic pain

scholarly journals Bipolar Versus Unipolar Intraarticular Pulsed Radiofrequency Thermocoagulation in Chronic Knee Pain Treatment: A Prospective Randomized Trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (20;3) ◽  
pp. 197-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ersel Gulec
Keyword(s):  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Treatment Quality ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency ◽  
Chronic Knee Pain ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group B

Background: Chronic knee pain is a major widespread problem causing significant impairment of daily function. Pulsed radiofrequency has been shown to reduce severe chronic joint pain as a non-pharmacological and less invasive treatment method. Objective: We aimed to compare the effectiveness of unipolar and bipolar intraarticular pulsed radiofrequency methods in chronic knee pain control. Study Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Setting: Pain clinic in Cukurova University Faculty of Medicine. Methods: One hundred patients, aged 20 – 70 years with grade 2 or 3 knee osteoarthritis were included in this study. Patients were randomly allocated into 2 groups to receive either unipolar (group U, n = 50) or bipolar (group B, n = 50) intraarticular pulsed radiofrequency (IAPRF) with a 45 V voltage, 2 Hz frequency, 42° C temperature, 10 msec pulse width, and 10 minute duration. We recorded visual analog scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index LK 3.1WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index LK 3.1) scores of patients at baseline and one, 4, and 12 weeks after the procedure. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in knee pain at 12 weeks after the procedure. Results: There was a significant difference between the groups according to VAS scores at all post-intervention time points. In group B, 84% of patients, and in the group U, 50% of patients achieved at least 50% knee pain relief from the baseline to 3 months. In group B, WOMAC scores were significantly lower than the group U at one and 3 months. Limitations: Lack of long-term clinical results and supportive laboratory tests. Conclusion: Bipolar IAPRF is more advantageous in reducing chronic knee pain and functional recovery compared with unipolar IAPRF. Further studies with longer follow-up times, laboratorybased tests, and different generator settings are required to establish the clinical importance and well-defined mechanism of action of PRF. This study protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT02141529), on May 15, 2014. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval date: January 16, 2014, and number: 26/9 Key words: Chronic pain, intraarticular, knee joint, knee osteoarthritis, pain management, pulsed radiofrequency treatment, quality of life, recovery of function

Nettle sting for chronic knee pain: A randomised controlled pilot study

2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Randall ◽  
Andy Dickens ◽  
Adrian White ◽  
Hilary Sanders ◽  
Mary Fox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Chronic Knee Pain ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Level of pain and physical function in patient with chronic knee pain visiting Dhulikhel hospital: A cross sectional study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Binaya Kandel ◽  
Surakshya Badal
Keyword(s):  
Physical Function ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Ageing Population ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Major Health Problem ◽  
Chronic Knee Pain

Abstract Background Knee pain is one of the common causes of chronic pain mainly in the older adults.Chronic knee pain (CKP) is commonly due to arthritic changes (osteoarthritis). Chronic knee pain is a common and major health problem in ageing population. Knee pain is associated with high levels of disability. So early detection and treatment of pain related functional limitation is likely to have major influence on healthy ageing. The general objective of this study was to quantify the level of pain and physical function in patient with CKP. Methods Preliminary screening of population with chronic knee pain was taken and cross sectional descriptive study was done. Questionnaire with inclusion criteria was fulfilled with administration of Nepali version of Numerical Pain Rating Scale and Nepali version of Patient Specific Functional Scale on interview as well as self-report basis and the data was managed by SPSS version 23. Results 75.6% of female with chronic knee pain was found with the average pain level found to be 5 in N-NPRS scale.Among them 80.8% of chronic knee pain was due to knee osteoarthritis. Sitting function was found to be affected in 82.1% of population with mean Nepali version of Patient specific functional Scale score of 2. Similarly 80.8% reported going downstairs to be difficult due to knee pain with N-PSFS score of 2. Conclusion Pain and functional disability are the principle findings in patient with chronic knee pain for which they seek medical treatment .So the treatments should target on functional task with effective strategy. addressing disability. Focus on function is important for the development of optimal rehabilitation programs in patients with chronic knee pain.

scholarly journals PO 18067 - Application of 5% lidocaine patch to painful surgical scars

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (Supl 1) ◽  
pp. 5S
Author(s):  
Rafael Da Rocha Macedo ◽  
João Paulo Gonçalves dos Santos ◽  
João Mendes Júnior ◽  
Emanuel Smith Lobato ◽  
Dario Putini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Orthopedic Surgery ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Social Role ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Role Functioning ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Lidocaine Patch ◽  
Treatment Onset

Introduction: Chronic postoperative pain, defined as persistent pain at the surgical incision site 3 months after a procedure, is a common complaint in orthopedic practice. Almost 50% of patients who undergo orthopedic surgery are presumably affected by this complaint. The objective of this study is to evaluate the lidocaine patch 5% as a method for neuropathic pain treatment after orthopedic surgery compared with therapeutic massage performed over the incisions. Methods: This is a prospective, randomized clinical trial of 37 patients who underwent orthopedic surgery from January 2015 to February 2017. All individuals were assessed using the pain visual analog scale (VAS) and the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire at treatment onset and at 30, 60 and 90 days of treatment. Results: Both groups showed improvement in pain, although the group using the patch showed a greater reduction of pain over time. There were no significant differences in the parameters assessed by the SF-36: physical functioning, physical role functioning, vitality, emotional role functioning, social role functioning, general health perceptions or mental health. The main advantage of the patch lay in the degree of patient satisfaction, which was significantly higher than that of massage, most likely because the patch is easily applied and generates a psychological effect as a drug therapy. Conclusion: The lidocaine patch and massage are effective treatment methods for reducing scar pain that show similar results. The patch is associated with an improvement in the degree of patient satisfaction.

scholarly journals Advice to use topical or oral ibuprofen for chronic knee pain in older people: randomised controlled trial and patient preference study

BMJ ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 336 (7636) ◽  
pp. 138-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Underwood ◽  
Deborah Ashby ◽  
Pamela Cross ◽  
Enid Hennessy ◽  
Louise Letley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Older People ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Knee Pain ◽  
Oral Ibuprofen ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Preference Study
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document