The Effect of the Phytocomplex Electrophoresis on the Clinical Symptomatology and Quality of Life of Patients with the Knee Joint Osteoarthritis

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Improving the effectiveness of rehabilitation of patients with osteoarthritis necessitates the use of drug electrophoresis with sinusoidal modulated currents (SMC-electrophoresis) in conjunction with drug therapy. The phytocomplex is proposed for electrophoresis composed of the compared, alfalfa and hops dry extract, containing flavonoids, coumestans, polysaccharides, steroids, essential amino acids, vitamins, mineral components and causing its possible use in osteoarthritis.
 AIM: The research aims to study the effect of the phytocomplex SMC-electrophoresis on the clinical symptoms and quality of life of patients with the knee joint osteoarthritis.
 METHODS: One hundred and eight patients were randomly distributed into 3 groups (n = 36). The phytocomplex SMC-electrophoresis was assigned to the first group, the amplipulse therapy (SMC) – to the second group, and the "basic" drug therapy – to the third group. The drug therapy of the patients of the third group was comparable with the drug treatment of those in the first two groups. The concentration of phytocomplex in the working solution was 10%. The electrotherapy was carried out in the aligned SMC mode in the first and fourth kind of works. Comparative indicators were as follows: WOMAC index, pain level on a visual analogue scale (VAS), Lequesne index, joint range of motion (JROM), articular and tendon indices, quality of life as per Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ).
 RESULTS: The use of the phytocomplex SMC-electrophoresis had a more pronounced positive effect on pain, knee joint function and quality of life of the patients compared with the treatment with drugs alone or using amplitude therapy. This was especially pronounced immediately after the rehabilitation. The analgesic effect was consistently maintained in the patients of the first group for up to 6 – 12 months, the second group – up to 3 – 6 months in terms of the level of pain according to the WOMAC and Lequesne indices, VAS, articular and tendon indices. Stable results have been obtained for improving the functions of the knee joint for up to 6 – 12 months using the phytocomplex SMC-electrophoresis as per the WOMAC and Lequesne indices. In the treatment by the phytocomplex SMC-electrophoresis, no side effects were registered.
 CONCLUSION: The obtained results give grounds for further research on the evaluation of the effectiveness of using the phytocomplex SMC-electrophoresis in microcirculatory disorders in the affected joint, for correcting connective tissue metabolism and electrolyte metabolism in the patients with the knee joint osteoarthritis.

Protective Effects of Gynostemma pentaphyllum (var. Ginpent) against Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Inflammation and Motor Alteration in Mice

“…These parameters affect the quantity and quality of the secondary metabolites present in the plant and consequently their biological activity [12][13][14]. Indeed, the ethnopharmacological properties of a phytocomplex do not always coincide with the biological effects observed for each single molecule present in it [15][16][17]. Starting from these considerations, the anti-inflammatory properties of the phytocomplex of a variety of Gynostemma pentaphyllum (var.…”

Marketing Evaluation of Consumer Preferences in Using Mobile Apps for Healthcare to Support Drug Adherence

“…This problem is especially acute in the treatment of chronic diseases that require a long (often lifelong) intake of drugs and compliance with a list of medical recommendations (McCabe et al, 2017;Nikishchenkova and Nikiforov, 2018;Norberg and Gustafsson, 2018;Rosenberg et al, 2020;Salimzadeh et al, 2019;Schinköthe, 2019). It is believed that low adherence is the main reason for reducing the manifested therapeutic effect, it significantly increases the likelihood of complications of the underlying disease, and leads to a decrease in the living standards of patients and to an increase in treatment costs (Babaskin et al, 2019a;Lukina et al, 2017).…”