Intra-Articular Morphine Versus Bupivacaine on Knee Motion in Patients With Osteoarthritis
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis causes pain and disability in a high percentage of elderly people. The aim of the present study was to compare the analgesic effect of intra-articular bupivacaine and morphine in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
DESIGN AND SETTING: A randomized and double-blind study was performed at a Pain Clinic of São Paulo Federal University.
METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with pain for more than 3 months and an intensity higher than 3 on a numerical scale (zero to 10) were included. G1 patients received 1 mg (1 ml) morphine diluted in 9 ml saline by the intra-articular route, and G2 patients received 25 mg (10 ml) 0.25% bupivacaine without epinephrine. Pain was assessed on a numerical scale and knee flexion and extension angles were measured after administration of the drugs at rest and during movement. The total amount of analgesic complementation with 500 mg paracetamol was also determined.
|Study Design:||Allocation: Randomized
Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double Blind (Subject, Investigator)
Primary Purpose: Treatment
|Official Title:||Intra-Articular Morphine Versus Bupivacaine on Knee Motion in Patients With Osteoarthritis: Randomized and Double-Blind Clinical Trial|
- Pain relief [ Time Frame: 1 year ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
- bupivacaine and morphine [ Time Frame: 1 year ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
|Study Start Date:||June 2004|
|Study Completion Date:||December 2006|
|Primary Completion Date:||July 2005 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)|
G1 patients received morphine intra-articular route G2 patients received bupivacaine without epinephrine.
1 mg (1 ml) morphine diluted in 9 ml saline by the intra-articular route, and 25 mg (10 ml) 0.25% bupivacaine without epinephrine.
Other Name: dimorf
Among the 39 patients selected, two patients from group 1 and five from group 2 were excluded from some of the analyses because they did not return on the day of assessment or because they used a complementary analgesic different from that standardized in the study
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00636415
|Pain Setor of Federal University of Sao Paulo|
|Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil|
|Study Chair:||Adriana M Issy, PhD||Federal University of São Paulo|