Use of multilayer silicone foam dressings as adjuvant therapy to prevent pressure injuries.

Despite progress in the prevention of pressure injuries (PIs), they remain a challenging public health problem because of their frequency and morbidity. Protection of the skin by multilayer silicone foam dressings may be an adjuvant measure to prevent PIs in high-risk patients. Despite the available clinical data and published recommendations on this measure, caregivers face difficulties in identifying patients who would benefit from this adjuvant measure. The objective of this work was to define the profiles of high-risk patients who would benefit optimally from this measure in combination with basic preventive procedures. This consensual expert opinion was drawn up using two methods: the Nominal Group Technique with eight medical and paramedical experts, and the Delphi process with 16 experts. The bases for this expert consensual opinion were a formal search and analysis of the published literature regarding evidence on the prevention of PIs using multilayer silicone foam dressings. The consensual expert opinion reported here addresses five proposals mostly intended to define patients who would benefit from the use of a multilayer silicone foam dressing (≥4 layers) to prevent PIs (sacrum and heels).

Usual care including home exercise with versus without spa therapy for chronic low back pain: protocol for the LOMBATHERM' study, a multicentric randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is highly prevalent and a major source of disability worldwide. Spa therapy is frequently used to treat low back pain, but the associated level of evidence for efficacy is insufficient. To fill this knowledge gap, this protocol proposes an appropriately powered, prospective, evaluator-blinded, multi-centre, two-parallel-arm, randomised (1:1), controlled trial that will compare spa therapy in addition to usual care including home exercise (UCHE) versus UCHE alone for the treatment of chronic low back pain. METHODS: Eligible patients (anticipated sample size of 358) will have had low back pain for more than 3 months and scores for pain greater than 40 mm on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Following initial consent for UCHE and baseline evaluations, patients are randomised (1:1) to UCHE alone, or UCHE plus spa therapy (18 days of mud packs, underwater massages, showers and water exercises under medical supervision). Patients in the latter arm will be requested to sign an additional consent form as per Zelen randomisation. Follow-up visits will occur at approximately months 1, 6 and 12 and (along with baseline assessments) will cover changes over time in VAS pain scores, the impact of lower back pain on daily life (the Rolland and Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ)), inappropriate fears and beliefs about lower back pain (the fear, avoidance, belief questionnaire (FABQ)), general quality of life (the Euroqol Group 5 dimension, 5 level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5 L)), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), consumption of analgesic drugs and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and overall state of health. Health resource use and days of sick leave (and subsequently the associated costs) will also be recorded. The primary outcome is the presence/absence of a clinically relevant change (improvement of at least 30%) in the VAS score for pain at 6 months. DISCUSSION: Despite the fact that previous, rather dated recommendations encourage spa therapy for the treatment of low back pain, the current literary corpus is methodologically poor. This protocol has been designed to provide results spanning a thorough range of outcomes at the highest evidence level possible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03910023. Registered on 10 April 2019.

Decrease of a specific biomarker of collagen degradation in osteoarthritis, Coll2-1, by treatment with highly bioavailable curcumin during an exploratory clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The management of osteoarthritis (OA) remains a challenge. There is a need not only for safe and efficient treatments but also for accurate and reliable biomarkers that would help diagnosis and monitoring both disease activity and treatment efficacy. Curcumin is basically a spice that is known for its anti-inflammatory properties. In vitro studies suggest that curcumin could be beneficial for cartilage in OA. The aim of this exploratory, non-controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the effects of bio-optimized curcumin in knee OA patients on the serum levels of specific biomarkers of OA and on the evaluation of pain. METHODS: Twenty two patients with knee OA were asked to take 2x3 caps/day of bio-optimized curcumin (Flexofytol®) for 3 months. They were monitored after 7, 14, 28 and 84 days of treatment. Pain over the last 24 hours and global assessment of disease activity by the patient were evaluated using a visual analog scale (100 mm). The serum levels of Coll-2-1, Coll-2-1NO2, Fib3-1, Fib3-2, CRP, CTX-II and MPO were determined before and after 14 and 84 days of treatment. RESULTS: The treatment with curcumin was globally well tolerated. It significantly reduced the serum level of Coll2-1 (p<0.002) and tended to decrease CRP. No other significant difference was observed with the other biomarkers. In addition, curcumin significantly reduced the global assessment of disease activity by the patient. CONCLUSION: This study highlighted the potential effect of curcumin in knee OA patient. This effect was reflected by the variation of a cartilage specific biomarker, Coll2-1 that was rapidly affected by the treatment. These results are encouraging for the qualification of Coll2-1 as a biomarker for the evaluation of curcumin in OA treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01909037 at clinicaltrials.gov.

Randomised, controlled trial of avocado-soybean unsaponifiable (Piascledine) effect on structure modification in hip osteoarthritis: the ERADIAS study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of avocado-soybean unsaponifiable-Expanscience (ASU-E) to slow radiographic progression in symptomatic hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Prospective, randomised, double blind, parallel group, placebo controlled 3 year trial. Patients with symptomatic (painful ≥1 year, Lequesne Index between 3 and 10) hip OA (American College of Rheumatology criteria) and a minimum joint space width (JSW) of the target hip between 1 and 4 mm on a pelvic radiograph were randomly assigned to 300 mg/day ASU-E or placebo. Standing pelvis, target hip anteroposterior (AP) and oblique views were taken annually. The primary outcome was JSW change at year 3, measured at the narrowest point on pelvic or target hip AP view (manual measure using a 0.1 mm graduated magnifying glass). The full analysis dataset (FAS) included all patients having at least two successive radiographs. An analysis of covariance Mixed Model for Repeated Measurements with Missing at Random (for missing data) was performed to compare adjusted 3 year JSW changes (primary outcome) and the percentages of 'progressors' (JSW loss≥0.5 mm) between groups. RESULTS: 399 patients were randomised (345 kept in the FAS), aged 62 (35-84) years, 54% women, mean body mass index 27 (SD 4) kg/m(2), mean symptom duration 4 (SD 5) years, 0-100 normalised Lequesne Index 30 (SD 9) and global pain visual analogue scale 37 (SD 23) mm. Mean baseline JSW was 2.8 (0.9) mm. There was no significant difference on mean JSW loss (-0.638 mm vs -0.672 mm, p=0.72, in the ASU-E and placebo groups, respectively) but there were 20% less progressors in the ASU-E than in the placebo group (40% vs 50%, respectively, p=0.040). No difference was observed on clinical outcomes. Safety was excellent. CONCLUSIONS: 3 year treatment with ASU-E reduces the percentage of JSW progressors, indicating a potential structure modifying effect in hip OA to be confirmed, and the clinical relevance requires further assessment.

Is there any scientific evidence for the use of glucosamine in the management of human osteoarthritis?

Glucosamine in its acetylated form is a natural constituent of some glycosaminoglycans (for example, hyaluronic acid and keratan sulfate) in the proteoglycans found in articular cartilage, intervertebral disc and synovial fluid. Glucosamine can be extracted and stabilized by chemical modification and used as a drug or a nutraceutical. It has been approved for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) in Europe to promote cartilage and joint health and is sold over the counter as a dietary supplement in the United States. Various formulations of glucosamine have been tested, including glucosamine sulfate and glucosamine hydrochloride. In vitro and in vivo studies have uncovered glucosamine's mechanisms of action on articular tissues (cartilage, synovial membrane and subchondral bone) and justified its efficacy by demonstrating structure-modifying and anti-inflammatory effects at high concentrations. However, results from clinical trials have raised many concerns. Pharmacokinetic studies have shown that glucosamine is easily absorbed, but the current treatment doses (for example, 1,500 mg/day) barely reach the required therapeutic concentration in plasma and tissue. The symptomatic effect size of glucosamine varies greatly depending on the formulation used and the quality of clinical trials. Importantly, the effect size reduces when evidence is accumulated chronologically and evidence for the structure-modifying effects of glucosamine are sparse. Hence, glucosamine was at first recommended by EULAR and OARSI for the management of knee pain and structure improvement in OA patients, but not in the most recent NICE guidelines. Consequently, the published recommendations for the management of OA require revision. Glucosamine is generally safe and although there are concerns about potential allergic and salt-related side effects of some formulations, no major adverse events have been reported so far. This paper examines all the in vitro and in vivo evidence for the mechanism of action of glucosamine as well as reviews the results of clinical trials. The pharmacokinetics, side effects and differences observed with different formulations of glucosamine and combination therapies are also considered. Finally, the importance of study design and criteria of evaluation are highlighted as new compounds represent new interesting options for the management of OA.