4.7 Article

Ayurveda in Knee Osteoarthritis-Secondary Analyses of a Randomized Controlled Trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 11, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11113047

关键词

Ayurveda; traditional Indian medicine; knee osteoarthritis; complementary medicine; integrative medicine

资金

  1. Ministry of AYUSH, Government of India
  2. Central Council for Research in Ayurvedic Sciences (CCRAS), Delhi, India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed the differences between Ayurvedic therapy and conventional therapy in knee osteoarthritis patients in South Asia, as well as the relevant variables for treatment response. The results suggested that the therapy arm and baseline values of the WOMAC Index may be the most important variables affecting the treatment outcomes.
Background: Ayurveda is widely practiced in South Asia in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of these secondary data analyses were to identify the most relevant variables for treatment response and group differences between Ayurvedic therapy compared to conventional therapy in knee OA patients. Methods: A total of 151 patients (Ayurveda n = 77, conventional care n = 74) were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle in a randomized controlled trial. Different statistical approaches including generalized linear models, a radial basis function (RBF) network, exhausted CHAID, classification and regression trees (CART), and C5.0 with adaptive boosting were applied. Results: The RBF network implicated that the therapy arm and the baseline values of the WOMAC Index subscales might be the most important variables for the significant between-group differences of the WOMAC Index from baseline to 12 weeks in favor of Ayurveda. The intake of nutritional supplements in the Ayurveda group did not seem to be a significant factor in changes in the WOMAC Index. Ayurveda patients with functional limitations > 60 points and pain > 25 points at baseline showed the greatest improvements in the WOMAC Index from baseline to 12 weeks (mean value 107.8 +/- 27.4). A C5.0 model with nine predictors had a predictive accuracy of 89.4% for a change in the WOMAC Index after 12 weeks > 10. With adaptive boosting, the accuracy rose to 98%. Conclusions: These secondary analyses suggested that therapeutic effects cannot be explained by the therapies themselves alone, although they were the most important factors in the applied models.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据