Rheumatoid Arthritis: Brosseau L

Casimiro L, Barnsley L, Brosseau L, Milne S, Robinson VA, Tugwell P, Wells G. · University of Ottawa, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1H 8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #16235342 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Acupuncture has been used by rehabilitation specialists as an adjunct therapy for the symptomatic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese medicine where thin needles are inserted in specific documented points believed to represent concentration of body energies. In some cases a small electrical impulse is added to the needles. Once the needles are inserted in some of the appropriate points, endorphins, morphine-like substances, have been shown to be released in the patient's system, thus inducing local or generalised analgesia (pain relief). This review is an update of the original review published in July 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of acupuncture or electroacupuncture on the objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, Current Contents , Sports Discus and CINAHL, initially done in September 2001, was updated in May 2005.The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registries. Handsearching was conducted on all retrieved papers and content experts were contacted to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Comparative controlled studies, such as randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials in patients with RA were eligible. Trials published in languages other than French and English were not analyzed. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search and extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all the extracted data. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a five point validated tool that measured the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: After the updated searches were conducted, five further potential articles were identified; however, these did not meet the inclusion criteria. Two studies involving a total of 84 people were included. One study used acupuncture while the other used electroacupuncture. In the acupuncture study, no statistically significant difference was found between groups for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), visual analogue scale for patient's global assessment (VAS G), number of swollen joints and tender joints, general health questionnaire (GHQ), modified disease activity scale (DAS) or for the decrease in analgesic intake. Although not statistically significant, pain in the treatment group improved by 4 points on a 0-100mm visual analogue scale versus no improvement in the placebo group. In the second study, using electroacupuncture, a significant decrease in knee pain was reported in the experimental group, 24 hours post treatment, when compared to the placebo group (WMD: -2.0 with 95% CI -3.6,-4.0). A significant decrease was found also at four months post-treatment (WMD -0.2, 95% CI: -0.36, -0.04) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of the study on electroacupuncture show that electroacupuncture may be beneficial to reduce symptomatic knee pain in patients with RA 24 hours and 4 months post treatment, the reviewers concluded that the poor quality of the trial, including the small sample size preclude its recommendation. The reviewers further conclude that acupuncture has no effect on ESR, CRP, pain, patient's global assessment, number of swollen joints, number of tender joints, general health, disease activity and reduction of analgesics. These conclusions are limited by methodological considerations such as the type of acupuncture (acupuncture vs electroacupuncture), the site of intervention, the low number of clinical trials and the small sample size of the included studies.

Brosseau L, Robinson V, Wells G, Debie R, Gam A, Harman K, Morin M, Shea B, Tugwell P. · University of Ottawa, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1H-8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #16235295 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for RA about ten years ago. LLLT is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. The effectiveness of LLLT for rheumatoid arthritis is still controversial. This review is an update of the original review published in October 1998. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We initially searched MEDLINE, EMBASE (from 1998), the registries of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group and the field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies as well as the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to June 2001. This search has now been updated to include articles published up to June 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion, then extracted data and assessed quality using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested using chi-squared. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with relative risks. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 222 patients were included in the five placebo-controlled trials, with 130 randomized to laser therapy. Relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 1.10 points (95% CI: 1.82, 0.39) on visual analogue scale relative to placebo, reduced morning stiffness duration by 27.5 minutes (95%CI: 2.9 to 52 minutes) and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI: 0.8 to 1.7). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion and local swelling did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application or treatment length. For RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference observed between the control and treatment hand for morning stiffness duration, and also no significant improvement in pain relief RR 13.00 (95% CI: 0.79 to 214.06). However, only one study was included as using the contralateral limb as control. . AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LLLT could be considered for short-term treatment for relief of pain and morning stiffness for RA patients, particularly since it has few side-effects. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is clearly a need to investigate the effects of these factors on LLLT effectiveness for RA in randomized controlled clinical trials.

Brosseau L, Judd MG, Marchand S, Robinson VA, Tugwell P, Wells G, Yonge K. · School of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #12918009 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, inflammatory, system disease. It commonly affects the small peripheral joints (such as fingers and wrist). The main goals of intervention for RA are preventing joint deformity, preserving joint function, and reducing inflammation and pain. Transelectrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a form of electrotherapy and is thought to produce analgesia according to the gate control theory. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of TENS in the treatment of RA of the hand. The primary outcomes of interest were relief of grip pain and resting pain intensity, relief of joint tenderness, number of tender joints and patient assessment of disease. The secondary objective was to determine the most effective mode of TENS application in pain control. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched for relevant studies, in English, in the Cochrane field of physical and related therapies, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, HEALTHSTAR, Sports Discus, CINAHL, Current Contents, and the PEDro database, up to October 2002. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two independent reviewers selected the trials that met predetermined inclusion criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study results were extracted by two independent reviewers. Continuous outcomes were analyzed by weighted mean difference (WMD) using a fixed effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Three RCTs, involving 78 people, were included in this review. AL-TENS and C-TENS were compared to placebo and to each other. Administration of 15 minutes of AL-TENS a week, for 3 weeks, resulted in a significant decrease in rest pain (67% relative benefit, 45 points absolute benefit on 100 mm VAS scale) but not in grip pain compared to placebo. AL-TENS did result in a clinical beneficial improvement in muscle power scores with a relative difference of 55%, and an absolute benefit of 0.98, compared to placebo. No significant difference was found between one 20-minute treatment duration of C-TENS versus AL-TENS, or C-TENS versus placebo on decrease in mean scores for rest pain or grip pain, or on the number of tender joints. Results showed a statistically significant reduction in joint tenderness, but no clinical benefit from C-TENS over placebo in relief of joint tenderness. No statistically significant difference was shown between 15 days of treatment with C-TENS or AL-TENS in relief of joint pain, although there was a clinically important benefit of C-TENS over AL-TENS on patient assessment of change in disease (risk difference 21%, NNT 5). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There are conflicting effects of TENS on pain outcomes in patients with RA. AL-TENS is beneficial for reducing pain intensity and improving muscle power scores over placebo while, conversely, C-TENS resulted in no clinical benefit on pain intensity compared with placebo. However C-TENS resulted in a clinical benefit on patient assessment of change in disease over AL-TENS. More well designed studies with a standardized protocol and adequate number of subjects are needed to fully conclude the effect of C-TENS and AL-TENS in the treatment of RA of the hand.

Milne S, Brosseau L, Robinson V, Noel MJ, Davis J, Drouin H, Wells G, Tugwell P. · School of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #12804511 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Knee arthroplasty (KA) is a common intervention that can enhance the quality of life for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Post-surgery rehabilitation protocols often include continuous passive motion (CPM). However, CPM protocols vary considerably amongst institutions. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the current meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of continuous passive motion following total knee arthroplasty. SEARCH STRATEGY: An electronic search of MEDLINE (1966 to 2002), EMBASE (1988 to 2002), CINAHL (1982 to 2002), HEALTH STAR (1991 to 1994) and CURRENT CONTENTS (1997 to 2002) was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, only randomized controlled trials of CPM for the treatment of participants post KA were eligible. Subjects were 18 years of age or older and had a pre-surgery diagnosis of degenerative joint disease. Both the experimental and control groups received physiotherapy. In addition to the physiotherapy intervention, the experimental group received CPM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion. Data were then extracted and the quality of the trial assessed using predetermined forms. Outcome measures of interest were: active and passive knee range of motion (ROM) length of hospital stay, pain, swelling and quadriceps strength. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed; in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Standardized mean differences (SMD) were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were presented as a relative risk. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials were retained for analysis. Results favouring CPM were found for the main comparison of CPM combined with physiotherapy (PT) versus PT alone at end of treatment. For the primary outcomes of interest, CPM combined with PT was found to statistically significantly increase active knee flexion (WMD 4.30 degrees, 95% CI: 1.96, 6.63) and decrease length of stay (WMD -0.69 days, 95% CI: -1.35, -0.03). CPM was also found to decrease the need for post-operative manipulation (RR 0.12, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.53). CPM did not significantly improve passive knee flexion and passive or active knee extension. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: CPM combined with PT, may offer beneficial results compared to PT alone in the short term rehabilitation following total knee arthroplasty.

Egan M, Brosseau L, Farmer M, Ouimet MA, Rees S, Wells G, Tugwell P. · Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #12535502 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Splints/orthoses are often recommended to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to decrease pain, decrease swelling and/or prevent deformity. These orthoses include resting hand splints, wrist supports, finger splints and special shoes and shoe inserts. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of splints/orthoses in relieving pain, decreasing swelling and/or preventing deformity and determine the impact of splints/orthoses on strength, mobility and function in people with RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the PEDro data base and Current Contents up to January 2002, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register to Issue 4, 2001 using the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. Unpublished studies were sought by hand searching conference proceeding and contacting key experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized control trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs), case-control and cohort studies comparing the use of specific orthoses against placebo, another active intervention (including another type of orthoses) or regular treatment were selected, according to an a priori protocol. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected the studies and abstracted data. The methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs was assessed using a validated scale. MAIN RESULTS: Twelve papers reporting on 10 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies dealt with the following: working wrist splints (5), resting hand and wrist splints (2), special shoes and insoles (3). There is evidence that wearing working wrist splints statistically significantly decreases grip strength and does not affect pain, morning stiffness, pinch grip, quality of life after up to 6 months of regular wear. We found no evidence that resting wrist and hand splints change pain, grip strength, Ritchie Index or number of swollen joints. However, patients who wore these splints for 2 months reported that they preferred use to non-use and padded resting splints to unpadded ones. The one study of special shoes provided evidence of significant benefits of wearing extra-depth shoes for 2 months including less pain on walking and stair climbing and more minutes pain free walking time. Extra-depth shoes with semi-rigid insoles provided better pain relief than extra-depth shoes alone when worn over 12 weeks. Posted insoles prevented progression of hallux valgus angle but did not affect pain or function. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to make firm conclusions about the effectiveness of working wrist splints in decreasing pain or increasing function for people with RA. Potential adverse effects such as decreased range of motion do not seem to be an issue, although some of these splints decrease grip strength and dexterity. Similarly, preliminary evidence suggests that resting hand and wrist splints do not seem to affect range of motion or pain, although patients preferred wearing a resting splint to not wearing one. There is evidence that extra-depth shoes and molded insoles decreases pain on weight-bearing activities such as standing, walking and stair-climbing. Posted insoles may be effective in preventing progression of hallux abductus angle but do not appear to have an impact on pain.

Casimiro L, Brosseau L, Milne S, Robinson V, Wells G, Tugwell P. · School of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #12137715 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Acupuncture has been used by rehabilitation specialists as an adjunct therapy for the symptomatic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Acupuncture is a traditional Chinese medicine where thin needles are inserted in specific documented points believed to represent concentration of body energies. In some cases a small electrical impulse is added to the needles. Once the needles are inserted in some of the appropriate points, endorphins, morphine-like substances, have been shown to be released in the patient's system, thus inducing local or generalised analgesia. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of acupuncture or electroacupuncture on the objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: A comprehensive search was done up to September 2001 with MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registers. Handsearching was conducted on all retrieved papers and content experts were contacted to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Comparative controlled studies, such as randomized controlled trials and control clinical trials in patients with RA were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were accepted. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search. These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all the extracted data. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a five (5) point validated tool that measured the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies (n=84) met the inclusion criteria. One used acupuncture (~~David 1999~~) while the other used electroacupuncture (~~Man 1974~~). In the first study using acupuncture, no significant difference was found between groups for to erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), the visual analogue scale for pain (VAS P), the visual analogue scale for patient's global assessment (VAS G), the number of swollen joints, the number of tender joints, to the general health questionnaire (GHQ), the score on the modified disease activity scale (DAS) or in the decrease in analgesic intake. In the second study, using electroacupuncture, a significant decrease in knee pain was reported in the experimental group, 24 hours post treatment, when compared to the placebo group (weighted mean difference of -2.0 with 95% CI -3.6,-4.0). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Although the results of the ~~Man 1974~~ study show that electroacupuncture may be beneficial to reduce symptomatic knee pain in patients with RA 24 hours post treatment, the reviewers concluded that the poor quality of the trial, including the small sample size proclude its recommendation. The reviewers further conclude that acupuncture has no effect on ESR, CRP, pain, patient's global assessment, number of swollen joints, number of tender joints, general health, disease activity and reduction of analgesics. These conclusions are limited by methodological considerations such as the type of acupuncture (acupuncture vs electroacupuncture), the site of intervention, the low number of clinical trials and the small sample size of the included studies.

Casimiro L, Brosseau L, Robinson V, Milne S, Judd M, Well G, Tugwell P, Shea B. · School of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #12137714 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Ultrasound is often used, by rehabilitation specialists, as an adjunct therapy for the symptomatic treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Its mechanical energy has antiinflammatory as well as analgesic properties. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of ultrasound on objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: A comprehensive search was conducted up to September 2001 with MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group specialized registers were also searched. Handsearching was conducted on all retrieved papers and content experts were contacted to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Comparative controlled studies, such as randomized controlled trials and clinical controlled trials in patients with RA were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were accepted. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search. These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all the extracted data. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a 5 point validated assessment tool that measures the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies (n=80 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Ultrasound to the palmar and dorsal aspect of the hand significantly increases grip strength when compared to a control (weighted mean difference (WMD) 28.07, 95CI: 13.37 to 42.77). Ultrasound to the palmar and dorsal aspects of the hand also appears to have beneficial effects to the following outcome measures: wrist dorsal flexion (WMD 1.90, 95%CI: 0.64 to 3.16), duration of morning stiffness (WMD 28.54, 95%CI: 0.18 to 56.90), number of swollen joints (WMD 1.02, 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.59) and the number of painful joints (WMD 1.20, 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.95). There is no significant difference between a)exercises and wax, b)exercises with ultrasound, c)exercises with ultrasound and faradic hand baths for the following outcome measures: pain score, grip strength, circumference of proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints, articular index, range of motion or level of activity. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The reviewers concluded that ultrasound in combination with the following treatment modalities; exercises, faradic current and wax baths, is not supported and cannot be recommended. Ultrasound alone can however, be used on the hand to increase grip strength, and to a lesser extent, based on the borderline results, increase wrist dorsal flexion, decrease morning stiffness, reduce the number of swollen joints and reduce the number of painful joints. It is important to note that these conclusions are limited by the methodological considerations such as poor quality of the trials, the low number of clinical trials, and the small sample size of the included studies.

Robinson V, Brosseau L, Casimiro L, Judd M, Shea B, Wells G, Tugwell P. · Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, 1 Stewart Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1N-6N5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #12076454 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Thermotherapy is often used as adjunct in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by rehabilitation specialists. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of different thermotherapy applications on objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Pedro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL up to and including September 2001. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and related therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registers. Hand searching was conducted on all retrieved articles for additional articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Comparative controlled studies, such as randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, cohort studies or case/control studies, of thermotherapy compared to control or active interventions in patients with RA were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were accepted. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search (VR, LB). These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all data extraction. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a 5 point scale that measured the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Seven studies (n=328 subjects) met the inclusion criteria. The results of this systematic review of thermotherapy for RA found that there was no significant effect of hot and ice packs applications (Ivey 1994), cryotherapy (Rembe 1970) and faradic baths (Hawkes 1986) on objective measures of disease activity including joint swelling, pain, medication intake, range of motion (ROM), grip strength, hand function compared to a control (no treatment) or active therapy. There is no significant difference between wax and therapeutic ultrasound as well as between wax and faradic bath combined to ultrasound for all the outcomes measured after 1, 2 or 3 week(s) of treatment (Hawkes 1986). There was no difference in patient preference for all types of thermotherapy. No harmful effects of thermotherapy were reported. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Superficial moist heat and cryotherapy can be used as a palliative therapy. Paraffin wax baths combined with exercises can be recommended for beneficial short term effects for arthritic hands. These conclusions are limited by methodological considerations such as the poor quality of trials.

Robinson V, Brosseau L, Casimiro L, Judd M, Shea B, Wells G, Tugwell P. · Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, 1 Stewart Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1N-6N5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #11869637 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Thermotherapy is often used as adjunct in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by rehabilitation specialists. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of different thermotherapy applications on objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Pedro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL up to and including September 2001. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and related therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registers. Hand searching was conducted on all retrieved articles for additional articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Comparative controlled studies, such as randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, cohort studies or case/control studies, of thermotherapy compared to control or active interventions in patients with RA were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were accepted. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search (VR, LB). These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all data extraction. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a 5 point scale that measured the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Seven studies (n=328 subjects) met the inclusion criteria. The results of this systematic review of thermotherapy for RA found that there was no significant effect of hot and ice packs applications (Ivey 1994), cryotherapy (Rembe 1970) and faradic baths (Hawkes 1986) on objective measures of disease activity including joint swelling, pain, medication intake, range of motion (ROM), grip strength, hand function compared to a control (no treatment) or active therapy. There is no significant difference between wax and therapeutic ultrasound as well as between wax and faradic bath combined to ultrasound for all the outcomes measured after 1, 2 or 3 week(s) of treatment (Hawkes 1986). There was no difference in patient preference for all types of thermotherapy. No harmful effects of thermotherapy were reported. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Superficial moist heat and cryotherapy can be used as a palliative therapy. Paraffin wax baths combined with exercises can be recommended for beneficial short term effects for arthritic hands. These conclusions are limited by methodological considerations such as the poor quality of trials.

Welch V, Brosseau L, Shea B, McGowan J, Wells G, Tugwell P. · Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Ottawa Hospital - Civic Campus - F6, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y-4E9. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #11406046 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Heat and cold therapy are often used as adjuncts in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis by rehabilitation specialists. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of heat and cold on objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline, Embase, PEDro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL up to June 2000. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and related therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registers. Handsearching was conducted on all retrieved articles for additional articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or controlled clinical trials of ice or heat compared to placebo or active interventions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and case-control and cohort studies were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were accepted. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search. These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all data extraction. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a 5 point scale that measured the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies (79 subjects) met the inclusion criteria. There was no effect on objective measures of disease activity (including inflammation, pain and x-ray measured joint destruction) of either ice versus control or heat versus control. Patients reported that they preferred heat therapy to no therapy (94% prefer heat therapy to no therapy). There was no difference in patient preference for heat or ice. No harmful effects of ice or heat were reported. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Since patients preferred thermotherapy to no therapy, thermotherapy can be used as a palliative therapy which can be applied at home as needed to relieve pain. These results are limited by the poor methodological quality of the trials.

Welch V, Brosseau L, Shea B, McGowan J, Wells G, Tugwell P. · Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Ottawa Hospital - Civic Campus - F6, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y-4E9. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #11034770 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Heat and cold therapy are often used as adjuncts in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis by rehabilitation specialists. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of heat and cold on objective and subjective measures of disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline, Embase, PEDro, Current Contents, Sports Discus and CINAHL up to June 2000. The Cochrane Field of Rehabilitation and related therapies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group were also contacted for a search of their specialized registers. Handsearching was conducted on all retrieved articles for additional articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or controlled clinical trials of ice or heat compared to placebo or active interventions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and case-control and cohort studies were eligible. No language restrictions were applied. Abstracts were accepted. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers identified potential articles from the literature search. These reviewers extracted data using pre-defined extraction forms. Consensus was reached on all data extraction. Quality was assessed by two reviewers using a 5 point scale that measured the quality of randomization, double-blinding and description of withdrawals. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies (79 subjects) met the inclusion criteria. There was no effect on objective measures of disease activity (including inflammation, pain and x-ray measured joint destruction) of either ice versus control or heat versus control. Patients reported that they preferred heat therapy to no therapy (94% like heat therapy better than no therapy). There was no difference in patient preference for heat or ice. No harmful effects of ice or heat were reported. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Since patients enjoy thermotherapy, and there are no harmful effects, thermotherapy should be recommended as a therapy which can be applied at home as needed to relieve pain. There is no need for further research on the effects of heat or cold for RA.

Brosseau L, Welch V, Wells G, deBie R, Gam A, Harman K, Morin M, Shea B, Tugwell P. · School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H-8M5. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev. · Pubmed #10796462 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects a large proportion of the population. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative non-invasive treatment for RA about 10 years ago. LLLT is a light source that generates extremely pure light, of a single wavelength. The effect is not thermal, but rather related to photochemical reactions in the cells. The effectiveness of LLLT for rheumatoid arthritis is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the registries of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal group and the field of Rehabilitation and Related Therapies as well as the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to January 30, 2000. SELECTION CRITERIA: Following an a priori protocol, we selected only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA were eligible. Abstracts were excluded unless further data could be obtained from the authors. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently select trials for inclusion, then extracted data and assessed quality using predetermined forms. Heterogeneity was tested with Cochran's Q test. A fixed effects model was used throughout for continuous variables, except where heterogeneity existed, in which case, a random effects model was used. Results were analyzed as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), where the difference between the treated and control groups was weighted by the inverse of the variance. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated by dividing the difference between treated and control by the baseline variance. SMD were used when different scales were used to measure the same concept (e.g. pain). Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed with odds ratios. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 204 patients were included in the five placebo-controlled trials, with 112 randomized to laser therapy. Relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 70% relative to placebo and reduced morning stiffness duration by 27.5 minutes (95%CI: 2.9 to 52 minutes) and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI: 0. 8 to 1.7 cm). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion and local swelling did not differ between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application or treatment length. For RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference between the control and treatment hand, but all hands improved in terms of pain relief and disease activity. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: In summary, LLLT for RA is beneficial as a minimum of a four-week treatment with reductions in pain and morning stiffness. On the one hand, this meta-analysis found that pooled data gave some evidence of a clinical effect, but the outcomes were in conflict, and it must therefore be concluded that firm documentation of the application of LLLT in RA is not possible. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques used. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this meta-analysis lacked data on how LLLT effectiveness is affected by four important factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage and site of application over nerves instead of joints.

Brosseau L, Milne S, Wells G, Tugwell P, Robinson V, Casimiro L, Pelland L, Noel MJ, Davis J, Drouin H. · School of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #15517640 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The objective of this metaanalysis is to examine the effectiveness of continuous passive motion (CPM) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: This metaanalysis used the methodology proposed by the Cochrane Collaboration. RESULTS: This review of 14 studies (952 patients) found significant improvements in active knee flexion and analgesic use 2 weeks postoperatively with the use of CPM and physiotherapy (PT) compared to PT alone. In addition, length of hospital stay and need for knee manipulations were significantly decreased in the CPM group. Not enough data were available to compare the degree of knee flexion applied or number of hours of application of CPM. However, significant results were not found for other comparisons such as short term CPM application versus longterm CPM application and wide treatment range versus small treatment range for the outcomes of active knee flexion, passive knee flexion and extension, presence of a fixed flexion deformity, use of analgesic, or total knee range of motion. CONCLUSION: CPM combined with PT may offer beneficial results for patients post-TKA. However, the potential benefits will need to be carefully weighed against the inconvenience and expense of CPM. More research is necessary to assess the differences in effectiveness with different characteristics of application such as total duration of treatment and intensity of CPM interventions.

Brosseau L, Welch V, Wells G, Tugwell P, de Bie R, Gam A, Harman K, Shea B, Morin M. · Physiotherapy Program, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #10955339 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affect a large proportion of the population. Low level laser therapy (LLLT) was introduced as an alternative noninvasive treatment for RA and OA about 10 years ago, but its effectiveness is still controversial. We assessed the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of RA and OA. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, following an a priori protocol, according to the methods recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Trials were identified by a literature search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Only randomized controlled trials of LLLT for the treatment of patients with a clinical diagnosis of RA or OA were eligible. Thirteen trials were included, with 212 patients randomized to laser and 174 patients to placebo laser, and 68 patients received active laser on one hand and placebo on the opposite hand. Treatment duration ranged from 4 to 10 weeks. Followup was reported by only 2 trials for up to 3 months. RESULTS: In patients with RA, relative to a separate control group, LLLT reduced pain by 70% relative to placebo and reduced morning stiffness by 27.5 min (95% CI -52.0 to -2.9), and increased tip to palm flexibility by 1.3 cm (95% CI -1.7 to -0.8). Other outcomes such as functional assessment, range of motion, and local swelling were not different between groups. There were no significant differences between subgroups based on LLLT dosage, wavelength, site of application, or treatment length. In RA, relative to a control group using the opposite hand, there was no difference between control and treatment hand, but all hands were improved in terms of pain relief and disease activity. For OA, a total of 197 patients were randomized. Pain was assessed by 3 trials. The pooled estimate (random effects) showed no effect on pain (standardized mean difference -0.2, 95% CI -1.0 to +0.6), but there was statistically significant heterogeneity (p > 0.05). Other outcomes of joint tenderness, joint mobility, and strength were not significant. CONCLUSION: LLLT should be considered for short term relief of pain and morning stiffness in RA, particularly since it has few side effects. For OA, the results are conflicting in different studies and may depend on the method of application and other features of the LLLT. Clinicians and researchers should consistently report the characteristics of the LLLT device and the application techniques. New trials on LLLT should make use of standardized, validated outcomes. Despite some positive findings, this metaanalysis lacked data on how effectiveness of LLLT is affected by 4 factors: wavelength, treatment duration of LLLT, dosage, and site of application over nerves instead of joints. There is a need to investigate the effects of these factors on effectiveness of LLLT for RA and OA in randomized controlled clinical trials.