MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087617758 · doi:10.1097/jsm.0b013e318256e75f

Do Ibuprofen or Glucosamine in Addition to Resistance Exercise Training Improve Muscle Strength in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis?

2012· letter· en· W2087617758 on OpenAlexaff
Linda J. Woodhouse

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2012
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyIbuprofenPlaceboRandomized controlled trialKnee painInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To compare the effects on muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) strength, and function, of treatment with ibuprofen, glucosamine, or placebo in addition to a strength training program, in older adults with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Design: Randomized, controlled, double-blinded 12-week trial. Setting: Community study in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2005 and 2006. Participants: Patients were recruited through newspaper advertisements. Of the 181 persons screened, 36 (20 women and 16 men) met the inclusion criteria: age 50 to 70 years and bilateral tibiofemoral OA of the knees, based on the American College of Rheumatology clinical and radiographic classification criteria, and with a Kellgren and Lawrence score between 1 and 4. Exclusion criteria were other chronic diseases, contraindication to the study medications, regular exercise training, severe obesity, excess alcohol consumption, and knee injury or previous or planned knee surgery. Intervention: Participants were instructed not to take ibuprofen and/or glucosamine for 1 month before the study. They were randomized to receive 500 mg of glucosamine sulfate 3 times per day, 600 mg of ibuprofen 2 times per day, or placebo. All patients were instructed to take 5 tablets per day (active and/or placebo) to maintain blinding, beginning 4 weeks before the exercise intervention so that training could be preceded by 4 weeks of glucosamine and 1 week of active ibuprofen. Acupuncture or 50 mg of tramadol was permitted for severe pain. The 12-week strength training program (45-minute supervised sessions, 3 per week) comprised progressive unilateral training for both legs focusing on the quadriceps muscle, using leg press and knee extension machines. Main Outcome Measures: Quadriceps muscle CSA was measured using magnetic resonance imaging. Isometric, concentric, and eccentric quadriceps strength was assessed using an isokinetic dynamometer. Maximal unilateral leg extension power was measured using a Nottingham Power Rig (Medical Engineering Unit, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom). Muscle strength was also measured as the greatest load that could be lifted 5 times without resting, on the knee extension and the leg press machines. Function was assessed as walking speed, stair-climbing time, and speed of chair stands. Pain was rated during strength measurements using a visual analog scale (VAS). All measures were done 2 to 4 days before and again after the 12 weeks of training. Main Results: After 12 weeks, CSA of the quadriceps muscle increased for all groups (P ≤ 0.05) but did not differ among them. In comparison with the placebo group, the ibuprofen group increased more in maximal isometric strength (difference, 0.22 Nm/kg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.42; P = 0.04), in maximal eccentric muscle strength (difference, 0.38 Nm/kg; 95% CI, 0.05-0.70; P = 0.02), and in maximal eccentric work (difference, 0.27 J/kg; 95% CI, 0.01-0.53; P = 0.04). In comparison with the placebo group, the glucosamine group increased more in maximal concentric muscle work (difference, 0.24 J/kg; 95% CI, 0.06-0.42; P = 0.01). On other measures of strength and power, the groups did not differ. Strength on the knee extension and leg press machines increased for both the ibuprofen and glucosamine groups (P < 0.05) but did not differ from placebo. No differences between groups were found on the measures of function, but all groups improved from baseline. Compared with placebo, both ibuprofen (difference, 0.82 points; 95% CI, 0.23-1.42; P < 0.01) and glucosamine (difference, 0.79 points; 95% CI, 0.24-1.33; P < 0.01) reduced reported pain (VAS) during the strength assessment. Satellite cell number increased in the glucosamine and placebo groups but not in the ibuprofen group. Conclusions: Quadriceps muscle mass increased with 12 weeks of strength training and was not affected by taking ibuprofen or glucosamine. The supplements did increase some measures of muscle strength and reduced pain while training.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of Sport MedicineSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207