Efficacy and Safety of Zhuanggu Joint Capsules in Combination with Celecoxib in Knee Osteoarthritis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a chronic joint disease that manifests as knee pain as well as different degrees of lower limb swelling, stiffness, and movement disorders. The therapeutic goal is to alleviate or eliminate pain, correct deformities, improve or restore joint functions, and improve the quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Zhuanggu joint capsules combined with celecoxib and the benefit of treatment with Zhuanggu alone for KOA. METHODS: This multi-center, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel controlled trial, started from December 2011 to May 2014, was carried out in 6 cities, including Beijing, Shanghai, Chongqing, Changchun, Chengdu, and Nanjing. A total of 432 patients with KOA were divided into three groups (144 cases in each group). The groups were treated, respectively, with Zhuanggu joint capsules combined with celecoxib capsule simulants, Zhuanggu joint capsules combined with celecoxib capsules, and celecoxib capsules combined with Zhuanggu joint capsule simulants for 4 weeks consecutively. The improvement of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index and the decreased rates in each dimension of WOMAC were evaluated before and after the treatment. Intergroup and intragroup comparisons of quantitative indices were performed. Statistically significant differences were evaluated with pairwise comparisons using Chi-square test (or Fisher's exact test) and an inspection level of α = 0.0167. RESULTS: Four weeks after treatment, the total efficacies of Zhuanggu group, combination group, and celecoxib group were 65%, 80%, and 64%, respectively, with statistically significant differences among the three groups (P = 0.005). Intergroup pairwise comparisons showed that the total efficacy of the combination group was significantly higher than that of the Zhuanggu (P = 0.005) and celecoxib (P = 0.003) groups. The difference between the latter two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.0167). Four weeks after discontinuation, the efficacies of the three groups were 78%, 95%, and 65%, respectively, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.0001). Intergroup pairwise comparisons revealed that the efficacy of the combination group was significantly better than that of the Zhuanggu and the celecoxib groups (P < 0.0001). The difference between the latter two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.0167). The incidences of adverse events in Zhuanggu group, combination group, and celecoxib group were 8.5%, 8.5%, and 11.1%, respectively, with insignificant differences (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Zhuanggu joint capsules alone or combined with celecoxib showed clinical efficacy in the treatment of KOA. The safety of Zhuanggu joint capsules alone or combined with celecoxib was acceptable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-IPR-15007267; http://www.medresman.org/uc/project/projectedit.aspx?proj=1364.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».