ObjectiveTo determine the efficacy and safety of Curcuma domestica extracts in pain reduction and functional improvement.Methods367 primary knee osteoarthritis patients with a pain score of 5 or higher were randomized to receive ibuprofen 1,200 mg/day or C. domestica extracts 1,500 mg/day for 4 weeks. The main outcomes were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total, WOMAC pain, WOMAC stiffness, and WOMAC function scores. Adverse events (AEs) were also recorded.Results185 and 182 patients were randomly assigned into C. domestica extracts and ibuprofen groups, respectively. The baseline characteristics were no different between groups. The mean of all WOMAC scores at weeks 0, 2, and 4 showed significant improvement when compared with the baseline in both groups. After using the noninferiority test, the mean difference (95% confidence interval) of WOMAC total, WOMAC pain, and WOMAC function scores at week 4 adjusted by values at week 0 of C. domestica extracts were noninferior to those for the ibuprofen group (P=0.010, P=0.018, and P=0.010, respectively), except for the WOMAC stiffness subscale, which showed a trend toward significance (P=0.060). The number of patients who developed AEs was no different between groups. However, the number of events of abdominal pain/discomfort was significantly higher in the ibuprofen group than that in the C. domestica extracts group (P=0.046). Most subjects (96%–97%) were satisfied with the treatment, and two-thirds rated themselves as improved in a global assessment.ConclusionC. domestica extracts are as effective as ibuprofen for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. The side effect profile was similar but with fewer gastrointestinal AE reports in the C. domestica extracts group.

OBJECTIVE:To investigate the effectiveness and efficiency of inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: A total of 2,081 patients across 14 hospitals were recruited in this prospective, multicenter cohort study. Data on the diagnoses, types of admission, length of stay (LOS), and functional ability score based on a modified Barthel index (BI) at admission (BIa) and at discharge (BId) were collected. Effectiveness was defined as the difference of BI (ΔBI) and efficiency as ΔBI divided by LOS. RESULTS: The majority of patients were diagnosed with spinal cord injury and stroke (41.8% and 37.5%, respectively). The mean age was 52.4 ± 18.6 years with a mean LOS of 23.9 ± 19.9 days, BIa of 9.4 ± 6.1, and BId of 12.3 ± 5.7. The overall effectiveness and efficiency were 2.9 ± 3.4 and 0.16 ± 0.30 scores/day, respectively; stroke rehabilitation provided the most effective and efficient BI improvement compared with rehabilitation for other diseases. Most patients (54.5%) received intensive functional rehabilitation, which was the most effective and efficient program (4.4 ± 3.6 and 0.23 ± 0.32 scores/day, respectively); the efficiency of the intensive program was not different among various diseases (P = 0.726). CONCLUSION: Stroke rehabilitation had the highest efficiency compared with rehabilitation for other neurological diseases. The most efficient type of admission was intensive rehabilitation, regardless of the disease being treated.

No abstract