Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

(Apparatus physiotherapy in the treatment of rheumatic diseases) [Russian]
Karateev DE, Luchikhina EL, Makevnina AV, Tangieva AR
Voprosy Kurortologii, Fizioterapii i Lechebnoi Fizicheskoi Kultury [Problems of Health Resorts, Physiotherapy and Exercise Therapy] 2021;98(2):31-38
clinical trial
6/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: Yes; Blind therapists: Yes; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: No; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

Rheumatic diseases are a major medical and social problem. The mechanisms' variety of these diseases' development requires different approaches: the strategies of drug and non-drug therapy in modern rheumatology are designed to be complemented to each other. The most relevant treatment of rheumatic conditions is the method of pulsed magnetic fields because the sensitivity of biological tissues to them is the highest one. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency and safety of the ALMAG plus magnetic therapy device in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joints. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The article presents preliminary data of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of the ALMAG plus magnetic therapy device in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joints. The study includes 70 patients (25 men, 45 women) of which 34 (48.6%) are patients with primary osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee joints (OAKS) and 36 (51.4%) are with secondary knee OA (on the background of immunoinflammatory rheumatic diseases). The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: the main group (active devices) with 34 (48.6%) patients and the control group (placebo devices) -- 36 (51.4%) patients. Patients of the main and control groups were comparable in all main parameters. During the study, the patients underwent 3 courses of treatment with the ALMAG plus apparatus or with a placebo apparatus during the year. The preliminary analysis includes data on 58 patients who underwent at least 2 courses of therapy (28 patients from the main group and 30 from the control group). RESULTS: Pain at rest decreased in the main group by 4.0 +/- 2.9 mm, in the control group by 1.07 +/- 2.21 mm (p = 0.420), after the second course by 5.13 +/- 3.4 and 1.81 +/- 2.19 mm (p = 0.406), respectively. In the main group, the total WOMAC index decreased after the 1st course of physiotherapy from 24.0 +/- 14.9 to 20.25 +/- 14.31 mm (p = 0.038), after the 2nd course it slightly increased -- to 22.96 +/- 14.8 mm (p = 0.314), in the control group the WOMAC index did not change statistically significantly: it decreased after the 1st course from 26.3+/-21.9 to 24.6 +/- 20.83 mm (p = 0.112), after the 2nd course it increased to 27.04 +/- 21.9 mm (p = 0.088). CONCLUSION: Thus, the use of the ALMAG plus apparatus at home contributed to a decrease in pain at rest and a significant decrease in the WOMAC index in patients with primary and secondary OA of the knee joints. Pulsed magnetotherapy did not cause adverse events or exacerbation of immunoinflammatory diseases.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help