Spa therapy together with supervised self-mobilisation improves pain, function and quality of life in patients with chronic shoulder pain: a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

To determine whether spa therapy has a beneficial effect on pain and disability in patients with chronic shoulder pain, this single-blind randomised controlled clinical trial included patients with chronic shoulder pain due to miscellaneous conditions attending one of four spa centres as outpatients. Patients were randomised into two groups: spa therapy (18 days of standardised treatment combining thermal therapy together with supervised mobilisation in a thermal pool) and controls (spa therapy delayed for 6 months: 'immediate versus delayed treatment' paradigm). All patients continued usual treatments during the 6-month follow-up period. The main endpoint was the mean change in the French-Quick DASH (F-QD) score at 6 months. The effect size of spa therapy was calculated, and the proportion of patients reaching minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) was compared. Secondary endpoints were the mean change in SF-36, treatment use and tolerance. One hundred eighty-six patients were included (94 patients as controls, 92 in the spa group) and analysed by intention to treat. At 6 months, the mean change in the F-QD score was statistically significantly greater among spa therapy patients than controls (- 32.6 versus - 8.15%; p < 0.001) with an effect size of 1.32 (95%CI: 0.97-1.68). A significantly greater proportion of spa therapy patients reached MCII (59.3 versus 17.9%). Spa therapy was well tolerated with a significant impact on SF-36 components but not on drug intake. Spa therapy provided a statistically significant benefit on pain, function and quality of life in patients with chronic shoulder pain after 6 months compared with usual care.

Spa therapy with physical rehabilitation is an alternative to usual spa therapy protocol in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

The objective of the study was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of low-frequency spa therapy combined with rehabilitation (Spa-rehab) versus standard spa therapy at 6 months for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (KOA). A prospective, randomized, monocenter, non-inferiority trial with recruitment of community-based symptomatic KOA patients was performed. Standard spa therapy comprised standardized spa treatment, 6 days a week for 3 weeks, and Spa-rehab therapy comprised spa sessions, 3 days a week for 3 weeks, followed by a dedicated rehabilitation program, 3 days a week for 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was achieving at 6 months a minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) for pain on a visual analog scale and/or an MCII for function on the WOMAC index and no knee surgery (composite MCII). Secondary endpoints were composite MCII at 3 months and achieving a Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for pain and function at 3 and 6 months. Among 283 patients included, 145 were allocated to standard spa therapy and 138 to Spa-rehab therapy. We could not demonstrate the non-inferiority of Spa-rehab therapy for the primary endpoint: difference for responders - 0.08 [90% CI (- 0.18 to 0.02), p = 0.14]. However, the difference test between the groups was not significant (p = 0.18). Spa-rehab therapy was not inferior to standard spa therapy for the composite MCII at 3 months or the PASS at 3 and 6 months. Spa-rehab therapy can reasonably be proposed to patients with symptomatic KOA. This protocol may be more cost-effective than standard spa therapy and avoid absenteeism from work and accommodation costs for patients who live close to a centre.