Knee Osteoarthritis
Conditions
Keywords
neuromuscular electrical stimulation, low-level laser therapy, knee osteoarthritis, muscle architecture, functionality, neuromuscular parameters
Brief summary
* The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of low-level laser therapy in combination with neuromuscular electrical stimulation on neuromuscular (muscular strength and morphology) and functional parameters (pain and functional tests) in elderly with knee osteoarthritis. * The hypothesis is that the association of low-level laser therapy with neuromuscular electrical stimulation could reduce joint pain associated with the inflammation and consequently potentiates the effects of electrical stimulation on the muscular system.
Detailed description
* Participants was randomized into one of three intervention groups (intervention period = 8 weeks after a 4 weeks control period in all groups). * Electrical stimulation group (18-32 min of pulsed current, stimulation frequency of 80Hz (Hertz), pulse duration of 200μs and stimulation intensity fixed near to maximal tolerated), * Laser group (low-level laser therapy dose of 4-6J (Joules) per point, six points at the knee joint) * Combined group (electrical stimulation and low-level laser therapy).
Interventions
Low-level laser therapy was administered twice a week with a minimum of 48h between sessions over a period of eight weeks.
Neuromuscular electrical stimulation was administered twice a week with a minimum of 48h between sessions over a period of eight weeks and with progressive intensity and volume.
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* elderly. * symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. * radiographic diagnostic of Grade 2 or 3 knee osteoarthritis.
Exclusion criteria
* a body mass index higher than 40 Kg/m2. * a diagnosis of hip, ankle, or toe osteoarthritis. * the use of crutches for locomotion. * participation in a strength-training programme or physiotherapy treatment for knee osteoarthritis in the past six months. * neurological or cognitive disorders. * rheumatoid arthritis. * electronic implants. * previous or upcoming surgery (within three months). * any cardiorespiratory, neuromuscular, or metabolic disease that could represent an absolute contraindication or a contraindication to the performance of maximum strength tests.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Torque change | Torque was measured 3 times during the study: baseline (week -4), before intervention (week 0) and post intervention (week 9). | Torque is an expression of the muscular strength and was assessed by dynamometry. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Muscular architecture change | Architecture was measured 3 times during the study: baseline (week -4), before intervention (week 0) and post intervention (week 9). | Muscular architecture (muscle thickness, pennation angle and fascicle length) were assessed by ultrasonography. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Functional Performance change | Functional performace was measured 3 times during the study: baseline (week -4), before intervention (week 0) and post intervention (week 9). | Functional performance was assessed using the six-minute walk test and the Timed Up and Go test. |
| Pain Change | Pain was measured 3 times during the study: baseline (week -4), before intervention (week 0) and post intervention (week 9). | Pain was assessed by questionnaire |
| Muscular electrical activation change | Muscular electrical activation was measured 3 times during the study: baseline (week -4), before intervention (week 0) and post intervention (week 9) | Electrical activation was assessed by electromyography (EMG). |
Countries
Brazil