Investigate the situation of knee osteoarthristic and evaluate the results of treatment in Ha Dong general hospital in 2021

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the situation of knee osteoarthritis and evaluate the results of treatment of primary knee osteoarthritis at Ha Dong General Hospital in 2021.
Subjects and methods: A retrospective descriptive study on 93 medical records with a diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis according to the standards of the American College of Rheumatology ACR 1991, VAS scale < 6 points, and Damp-Cold combined with Liver and Kidney deficiency according to TCM at Ha Dong General Hospital in 2021. Experimental group: Moxibustion-infrared lamp + Doc hoat ky sinh thang decoction + Electro- acupuncture for 20 days. Control group: Doc hoat ky sinh thang decoction + Electro-acupuncture for 20 days.
Results: Physical workers and BMI ≥ 23 increase the risk of knee osteoarthritis. X-ray characteristics of the knee joint: mainly degeneration with 92.47% and inflammation with 60.81%. Features of knee joint ultrasound: Knee effusion accounted for 37.84%, Baker cyst accounted for 11.86%; 83.87% had osteophyte, 51.61% had endplate sclerosis and 39.78% had joint space narrowing. According to modern medicine: the number of patients with knee osteoarthritis and inflamed knee osteoarthritis has a similar incidence. According to traditional medicine: 81.72% were diagnosed with Damp-Cold combined with Liver and Kidney deficiency; 18.28% were Damp-Heat combined with Liver and Kidney deficiency, 9.68% were Damp-Cold standalone. The pain reduction efficiency according to VAS of the experimental group was 5.96 ± 1.09 points, higher than that of the control group which was 4.56 ± 0.77 points with statistical significance (p<0.05). In the experimental group, 30% of patients had no pain, 70% of patients had mild pain. In the control group, 10% of patients had moderate pain, 86.7% had mild pain and only 3.3% of patients had no pain. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p<0.05). The improvement effect of the experimental group was better than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). During 20 days of treatment, there were no unwanted clinical effects.