Affiliations: [a] Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Eskisehir Osmangazi University Medicine Faculty, Eskisehir, Turkey | [b] Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Eskisehir State Hospital, Eskisehir, Turkey | [c] Department of Radiology, Eskisehir Osmangazi University Medicine Faculty, Eskisehir, Turkey | [d] Department of Biostatistics, Eskisehir Osmangazi University Medicine Faculty, Eskisehir, Turkey
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Onur Armagan, Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Eskisehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Medicine, Meselik 26480 Eskisehir, Turkey. Tel.: +90 222 2392979/2457; Fax: +90 222 2393774; E-mail: dronurarmagan@hotmail.com
Abstract: Objectives:The aim of the present study was to evaluate the symptomatic effects of glucosamine sulphate (GS) in comparison to the exercise therapy, as well effects on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) findings of cartilage loss in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Materials and Methods:Seventy patients with a diagnosis of knee OA were randomly divided into two groups. First group of patients (n=40) were treated with 1500 mg/day oral glucosamine sulphate and the second group (n=30) performed a home exercise program for a period of 6 months. Results:Compared with baseline, significant improvements were observed in the visual analogue scale pain scores and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index and 20-min walking time in both groups (p<0.001); there were no significant differences between the two treatment groups. Upon the evaluation of joint cartilage thickness by MRI, an improvement was evident in only in the area of medial femoral condyle of patients who had performed a home exercise program (p<0.05). Conclusion:The results of the present study suggest that both oral GS treatment and exercise therapy are efficient in the symptomatic treatment of patients with knee OA. However, exercise therapy found to have a better chondroprotective effect than oral GS treatment in this patient population.
