Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32774422›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Yellow Oil Formulations 3 and 4 versus Indomethacin Solution in Patients with Symptomatic Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Nut Koonrungsesomboon, Supanimit Teekachunhatean, Sunee Chansakaow, Nutthiya Hanprasertpong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Potential Effects of Indomethacin on Alleviating Osteoarthritis ProgressionJournal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. The Efficacy ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Experimental Therapeutics for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis.Journal of experimental pharmacology · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nut KoonrungsesomboonDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Supanimit TeekachunhateanDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1329-379X
Sunee ChansakaowDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Medicinal Plant Innovation Center, Faculty of Pharmacy, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.
Nutthiya HanprasertpongDepartment of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3739-4723

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTopical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely prescribed for the treatment of symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. However, searching for alternatives such as locally available medicinal herbs to manage OA knee pain remains of clinical value. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two yellow oil formulations in patients with OA of the knee.

methodsThis prospective, randomized, single-blind, active-controlled, noninferiority study enrolled 102 patients with OA of the knee. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to apply either yellow oil formulation 3 (YOF3), yellow oil formulation 4 (YOF4), or indomethacin solution (INDO) topically four times daily for four weeks. Outcomes were assessed on a biweekly basis. The primary efficacy outcome measure was a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS) of pain, while secondary endpoints included knee function, physical performance assessments, and safety parameters. Modified intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were applied. Assessment of noninferiority was done with a prespecified margin of 10 mm for VAS pain.

resultsOf 102 patients enrolled, 86 completed the study: 29/34 in the YOF3 group, 25/34 in the YOF4 group, and 32/34 in the INDO group. The absolute reduction in VAS pain at the final evaluation was -25.06 ± 13.91, -18.50 ± 16.06, and -23.38 ± 10.05 mm in the YOF3, YOF4, and INDO groups, respectively (

conclusionsYOF3 was shown to be noninferior to INDO in relieving knee pain and should be considered an alternative for the treatment of symptomatic OA of the knee. Further research into the mechanism of action of YOF3 and its long-term efficacy and safety is required.

Identifiers

PMID32774422
PMCPMC7397436

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.