AB0600 VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION VERSUS PHYSICAL REHABILITATION IN KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS COMPARATIVE STUDY ABOUT 117 CASES

  • Lahrichi S
  • Nassar K
  • Janani S
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Viscosupplementation with hyaluronic acid, and physical rehabilitation are part of the adjunct treatments for osteoarthritis, and particularly knee osteoarthritis.They can be used alone or combined. Objectives: To compare the efficacy of rehabilitation and viscosupplementation in patients followed for stage II and III osteoarthritis. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study, conducted in the department of rheumatology of the University Hospital ofIbn Rochd, Casablanca, between August 2020 and December 2020. Inclusion criteria: patients with stage II and III knee osteoarthritis fulfilling the ACR criteria. The diagnosis was made on standard x-rays including antero-posterior and lateral views. The functionalassessmentwas made with functional algo indices, WOMAC and Lequesnne. Pain was assessed with a visual analogue scale (VAS) on Day 0 and after 3 months. The patients were divided into 3 groups of 39 patients, the first (G1) received an infiltration of hyaluronic acid according to different protocols (multiple injections or single injection), the second (G2) benefited from a rehabilitation program twiceor three timesa week for three months, and the third group (G3) benefited from viscosupplementation associated with rehabilitation. Patients who received an intra-articular corticosteroid injection in the last 3 months were excluded. Results: There were 117 patients. The mean age was 59.6 ± 8.6, with a female predominance of 96.8%. Knee osteoarthritis was clinically patent for 5.8 years, with an average of 7.4 painful flares. Gonarthrosis was bicompartmental in 52 patients and tri-compartmental in 18 patients. 45% had a family history of osteoarthritis. 28% were hypertensive, 18 patients were diabetic and 51.87% were obese according to the body mass index, with an average of 30.5 ± 5.2 kg/m2. 65% had already received oral anti-arthritis drugs for an average of 1 year. Functional improvement was approximately 38% in G1, 26% in G2, and 42% in G3. A significant algo-functional improvement was noted in G1 (p = 0.04) and G3 (p = 0.03). LEQUESNE's index went from an average of 8 in the 3 groups to an average of 4 inG1 and G3 versus 6 in G2, which corresponds to an average handicap (p = 0.2). The final value of the WOMAC index in G1 was 26.57 versus 32.21 in G2 (p = 0.01) and versus 22.36 in G3 (p = 0.02). Conclusion: In our study, the final evaluation showed a decrease in pain and an improvement in functional capacity ranging from 36 to 58%. This improvement in algo-functional indices was significantly more marked in G3[1]. Our study shows that the combination of visco-supplementation with physical rehabilitation gives better results by improving the algo-functional indices than by visco-supplementation alone. Our findings are consistent with the results of the literature[2].

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lahrichi, S., Nassar, K., & Janani, S. (2021). AB0600 VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION VERSUS PHYSICAL REHABILITATION IN KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS COMPARATIVE STUDY ABOUT 117 CASES. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 80, 1336. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-eular.3109

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free