Home > Journals > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness > Past Issues > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2016 July-August;56(7-8) > The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2016 July-August;56(7-8):901-8

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Cite this article as

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  SPORT INJURIES, REHABILITATION 

The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 2016 July-August;56(7-8):901-8

Copyright © 2016 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Effect of single injection of platelet-rich plasma in comparison with corticosteroid on knee osteoarthritis: a double-blind randomized clinical trial

Bijan FOROGH 1, Elaheh MIANEHSAZ 2, Shervan SHOAEE 3, Tannaz AHADI 1, Gholam R. RAISSI, Simin SAJADI 1

1 Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Firouzgar Hospital, Tehran, Iran; 2 Clinical Research Unit, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran; 3 Elderly Health Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Population Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


PDF


BACKGROUND: Evidence on the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in treating osteoarthritis (OA) is insufficient. Therefore, the present study compares the effects of a one-time injection of PRP and corticosteroid (CS).
METHODS: In the present randomized double blind clinical trial, the participants who suffered from knee osteoarthritis (Grades II/III), were randomly divided into two groups: intra articular injection of PRP and CS. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), the 20-Meter-Walk Test (20MW), active and passive ranges of motions (ROM), flexion contracture, and pain intensity based on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were assessed before, 2-months, and 6-months after interventions.
RESULTS: Forty-one participants (48 knees) were involved in the research (66.7% women; average age of 61.1±7.0 years old). Compared to the group treated with corticosteroid, pain relief (df: 6, 35; F=11.0; P=0.007), symptom free (df:6, 35; F=23.0; P<0.001), activities of daily living (ADL) (df:6, 35; F=10.7; P=0.005) and quality of life (df:6, 35; F=5.2; P=0.02) in the RPR group were significantly higher, but sporting ability was not different between the two groups (df: 6, 35; F=0.6; P=0.55). PRP was significantly more helpful for relieving patients’ pain (VAS) compared to corticosteroids (df: 6, 35; F=32.0; P=0.001). It is also notable that using PRP was more helpful in improving the 20MW test than corticosteroid treatment (df: 6, 35; F=7.4; P=0.04) but none of the treatments had any impact on active flexion ROM، passive flexion ROM and flexion contracture (P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that one shot of PRP injection, decreased joint pain more and longer-term, alleviated the symptoms, and enhanced the activity of daily living and quality of life in short-term duration in comparison with CS.

top of page