arthralgia

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that methotrexate is both safe and effective for treatment of pain and joint stiffness in patients with osteoarthritis. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Background:
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent chronic joint disorder among middle-aged and older adults, characterized by progressive cartilage degeneration, subchondral bone remodeling, and osteophyte formation, leading to joint pain, stiffness, dysfunction, and reduced quality of life. With the global aging population, OA imposes a growing socioeconomic burden, yet no disease-modifying therapy is currently available—particularly for moderate-to-severe stages. Emerging evidence implicates synovial inflammation as a central contributor to OA symptoms and progression, raising interest in methotrexate (MTX), a well-established, low-dose anti-inflammatory agent used safely in rheumatoid arthritis. Preliminary studies suggest MTX may alleviate OA-related pain, but findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been inconsistent and limited in number. Given recent new RCTs and the heterogeneity of existing outcomes, an updated systematic review and meta-analysis is urgently needed to clarify the efficacy and safety of MTX in OA and inform future clinical trial design.

Methods:
PubMed, ClinicalTrials, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and other databases were searched to find randomized controlled trials (RCT) of MTX treatment of OA. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane "risk of bias" assessment tool, and the meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration, London, UK).

Results:
Fifteen RCTs involving 1591 participants were included in this review. The meta-analysis results showed that the ineffective rate in the experimental group was lower [RR: 0.40 (0.24, 0.67), P = .004]; the VAS in the experimental group was lower [WMD: −0.66 (−1.08, −0.24), P = .002]; the WOMAC score-stiffness in the experimental group was lower [WMD: −0.72 (−1.04, −0.41), P < .00001]; the WOMAC score-function in the experimental group was lower [WMD: −7.72 (−13.56, −1.87), P = .01]. The adverse events in the experimental group were not statistically significant compared with the control group [RR: 1.04 (0.77, 1.42), P = .78].

Conclusion:
MTX demonstrates potential in effectively alleviating pain, improving joint function, and slowing disease progression in patients with OA. Its safety profile is comparable to that of control treatments, making it a viable and reliable therapeutic option worthy of broader clinical application.

Author/s:

Wan, Lifei, Yang, Qianyue, Yang, Kailin, Zeng, Liuting, Sun, Lingyun

The effects of a home-based exercise intervention on elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis: a quasi-experimental study

Jeffrey Wilson — Wed, 01 May 2019 20:18:15 +0000

Date Added:

May 1, 2019

Journal/Publication:

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Publisher:

BioMed Central

Publication Date:

April 9, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

The effects of a home-based exercise intervention on elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis: a quasi-experimental study

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1186/s12891-019-2521-4

Keywords

osteoarthritis

physical therapy

health education

PMID (1):

30967131

MeSH

In this admittedly imperfect study, older osteoarthritis patients receiving 8 hours of physical therapy, periodic telephone support, and health education had significantly less pain and more function at 3 months than control patients receiving standard care. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

BACKGROUND:

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is common in elderly people, causes pain, loss of physical functioning, and disability. This was a two-arm, superiority, quasi-experimental trial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based exercise intervention (HBEI) to reduce KOA symptoms and improve the physical functioning of elderly patients.

METHODS:

A total of 171 elderly patients (60 years of age or older) with KOA were recruited from four community centers. Patients from two community centers were randomly assigned to the intervention group (IG) and the other two centers were randomly assigned to the control group (CG). Participants in the IG received a 12-week HBEI (including four 2-h sessions supervised by a physiotherapist and fortnightly telephone support) combined with health education, while patients in the CG only received health education. The participants and physiotherapists were aware of the group assignment and alternative treatment components, but the study's hypotheses were not disclosed to the participants. Pain intensity, joint stiffness, lower-limb muscle strength, balance, mobility, and quality of life were measured before and after the intervention by the same blinded assessor.

RESULTS:

A total of 171 patients (IG: n = 84, CG: n = 87) were enrolled. Data were obtained from 141 patients with an average age of 68 (range, 60-86 years) who completed the 12-week study (IG: n = 71, CG: n = 70). No significant group differences were found in any outcome measures at baseline. At week 12, the pretest/posttest changes 3significant between-group differences in decreases in pain intensity (- 1.60 (CI, - 2.75 to - 0.58)) and stiffness (- 0.79 (CI, - 1.37 to - 0.21)), with the IG exhibiting significantly larger improvements on both measures than the CG. The IG also showed significantly greater improvements on all the secondary outcomes than the CG did.

CONCLUSIONS:

HBEI may be effective for relieving KOA symptoms, increasing the physical functioning, and improving quality of life in community-dwelling KOA elderly patients. A large randomized controlled trial with long-term follow-up is needed to confirm these findings.

Author/s:

Chen, Hongbo, Zheng, Xiaoyan, Huang, Hongjie, Liu, Congying, Wan, Qiaoqin, Shang, Shaomei

Does CBD Actually Work?

Tracy Ashby — Wed, 17 Apr 2019 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

April 18, 2019

Journal/Publication:

Quartz

Publication Date:

April 17, 2019

URL:

Does CBD Actually Work?

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

Keywords

MeSH

nebulizers and vaporizers

This lay press article attempts to summarize what is currently known about the efficacy of cannabidiol (CBD) for anxiety, pain, and sleep. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Perhaps you’ve heard a lot of people are using CBD.

The chemical compound, naturally occurring in cannabis plants, doesn’t get you high, but does have a wide swath of other purported effects making it very popular. Although clinical studies haven’t necessarily proven those results, many Americans are testing CBD (which stands for “cannabidiol”) for themselves. All over the US, people are rubbing CBD balm onto aching joints, dropping CBD tinctures under tired tongues, popping CBD gummies, and puffing on CBD oil-filled vaporizers in hopes of chilling out.

On Quartz’s behalf, Harris Poll recently surveyed more than 2,000 people in the US about their experience, knowledge, and opinions regarding CBD and found that more than 85% of Americans have heard of CBD, and of those, more than one in five have tried it.

Author/s:

Avins, Jenni