Premium
Effect of laying on of hands as a complementary therapy for pain and functioning in older women with knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled clinical trial
Author(s) -
Zacaron Katy Andrade Monteiro,
Santos Cláudia Soares,
Corrêa Cyntia Pace Schmitz,
Cotta e Silva Yuri,
Reis Isabel Cristina Fonseca,
Sant'Ana Simões Maryana,
Lucchetti Giancarlo
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
international journal of rheumatic diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.795
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1756-185X
pISSN - 1756-1841
DOI - 10.1111/1756-185x.13952
Subject(s) - womac , medicine , osteoarthritis , randomized controlled trial , visual analogue scale , physical therapy , anxiety , quality of life (healthcare) , alternative medicine , psychiatry , pathology , nursing
Aim To assess the effects of laying on of hands (LooH) as a complementary therapy to kinesiotherapy, on pain, joint stiffness, and functional capacity of older women with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) compared to a control group. Methods In this randomized controlled clinical trial, participants were assigned into 3 groups: LooH with a spiritual component (“Spiritist passe” Group ‐ SPG), LooH without a spiritual component (LooH Group ‐ LHG), and a control group receiving no complementary intervention (Control Group ‐ CG). Patients were assessed at baseline, 8 weeks, and 16 weeks. Primary outcomes were joint stiffness and functional capacity (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]), and pain (WOMAC and visual analog scale). Secondary outcomes were anxiety, depression, mobility, and quality of life. Differences between groups were evaluated using an intention‐to‐treat approach. Results A total of 120 women (mean age = 69.2 ± 5.2 years) with KOA were randomized (40 participants per group). At 8 weeks, SPG differed significantly from the LHG for WOMAC Functional Status (between‐group difference in the change = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.59, P = .001); Anxiety levels (between‐group difference in the change = 1.38; 95% CI: 0.11 to 2.65, P = .027); and also from the CG for all outcomes with exception of WOMAC Stiffness. After 16 weeks, SPG differed significantly from the LHG only for WOMAC Functional Status (between‐group difference in the change = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.52, P = .001]) and also from the CG for all outcomes with exception of WOMAC Stiffness and timed up‐and‐go. Conclusion Our results suggest that LooH with a “spiritual component” may promote better long‐term functional outcomes than both LooH without a “spiritual component” and a control group without LooH.