Comparison of 10.6 μm Laser Moxibustion with Traditional Moxibustion in Knee Osteoarthritic Therapy: A Randomized Noninferiority Clinical Trial

Efficacy and safety comparison of infrared laser moxibustion and traditional moxibustion in knee osteoarthritis: study protocol for a Zelen-design randomized controlled non-inferiority clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is the most common chronic degenerative joint disease and places a substantial burden on the public health resources in China. The purpose of this study is to preliminarily evaluate whether infrared laser moxibustion (ILM) is non-inferior to traditional moxibustion (TM) in the treatment of KOA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the designed Zelen-design randomized controlled non-inferiority clinical trial, a total of 74 patients with KOA will be randomly allocated to one of two interventions: ILM treatment or TM treatment. All participants will receive a 6-week treatment and a follow-up 4 weeks after treatment. The primary outcomes will be the mean change in pain scores on the numeric rating scale (NRS) measured at baseline and the end of last treatment at week 6. The secondary outcomes will be the pain scores on the NRS from weeks 1 to 5 after the start of treatment and the changes from baseline to endpoints (weeks 6 and 10) in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), SF-36, knee circumference, and 6-min walking test. In addition, safety assessment will be performed throughout the trial.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study will help determine whether a 6-week treatment with ILM is non-inferior to TM in patients with KOA, therefore providing evidence to verify if ILM can become a safer alternative for TM in clinical applications in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registration Platform (ChiCTR2200065264); Pre-results. Registered on 1 November 2022.

A comparison of jade moxibustion and traditional moxibustion in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study was developed to compare the relative clinical efficacy of traditional moxibustion and Jade moxibustion in an effort to define the most effective approaches to treating knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

In total, 94 patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to the traditional moxibustion (TM) and Jade moxibustion (JM) groups. For JM, a jade kneepad was preheated for 3 minutes via electrification, with the jade in the kneepad being pressed onto acupoints when reaching an initial temperature of 46°C. For patients in the TM group, moxa cones were applied to acupoints for treatment. In total, 12 treatments were performed for patients in each group, with treatment being conducted 3 times per week. Study outcomes included 36-item short-form health survey and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index knee stiffness scores. In addition, serum levels of osteoarthritis-related cytokines were measured.

RESULTS

Overall, 89/94 patients completed this study, including 44 and 45 in the TM and JM groups, respectively. The 36-item short-form health survey physical functioning at weeks 12 and 24 (P = .033, 0.001), role-physical at weeks 4 and 24 (P = .030, 0.014), and role-emotional at week 4 (P = .045) were the only scores to differ significantly between the TM and JM groups. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index stiffness scores in the JM groups improved significantly relative to baseline at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24 (all P < .01). The scores in the TM group differed significantly at all time points relative to baseline (all P < .01), with no differences between groups (all P > .05). Serum Interleukin-2 levels were lower in both groups (all P < .01). Cartilage oligomeric matrix protein and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 only differed significantly for patients treated via JM (P < .05, P < .01), with the same also being true for Interleukin-1β and Interleukin-8 in the TM group (all P < .01). No significant differences in other cytokines were observed, nor did they differ significantly between groups (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that JM treatment can improve knee osteoarthritis patient quality of life, alleviating joint stiffness and restoring joint function with a level of efficacy comparable to TM.