Traumeel vs. diclofenac for reducing pain and improving ankle mobility after acute ankle sprain: a multicentre, randomised, blinded, controlled and non-inferiority trial

C González de Vega, C Speed, B Wolfarth, J González, C González de Vega, C Speed, B Wolfarth, J González

Abstract

Background: Acute ankle sprains are common and activity limiting injuries, and topical diclofenac gel has proven efficacy in alleviating pain and restoring function. This trial aimed to compare a topical natural agent, Traumeel with topical diclofenac gel (1%) in the management of acute ankle sprain.

Methods: This prospective, multicentre, randomised, blinded, active-control and non-inferiority study involved 449 physically active adults sustaining unilateral grade 1 or 2 ankle sprain within the past 24 h. Participants were randomised to receive 2 g of Traumeel ointment (T-O) (n = 152) or Traumeel gel (T-G) (n = 150) or diclofenac gel (D-G) (n = 147), administered topically to the ankle three times a day for 14 days, with 6-weeks follow up.

Results: Day 7 median percentage reductions in Visual Analogue Scale pain score were 60.6%, 71.1% and 68.9% for the T-O, T-G and D-G groups, respectively. Total pain relief was reported by 12 (8.5%), 7 (5.0%) and 8 (5.9%) participants in each group, respectively. Median improvements in Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living subscale score were 26.2, 26.2 and 25.0 points for T-O, T-G and D-G groups, respectively. Mann-Whitney effect sizes and lower bound confidence intervals demonstrated non-inferiority of Traumeel vs. diclofenac for reducing pain and functional improvement. At 6 weeks, participants reported total pain relief and normal functioning. Adverse events (n = 43) were reported by 31/447 participants (6.9%). Treatments were equally well tolerated.

Conclusions: T-O and T-G decreased pain and improved joint function to the same extent as D-G in acute ankle sprain, and were well tolerated.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01066520.

© 2013 The Authors. International Journal of Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
TAASS trial flowchart of study population with ankle sprain randomised and followed up in study monitoring efficacy. Exclusions, all circumstances leading to exclusion from Safety or Intent-To-Treat or Per Protocol populations; In/Ex criteria, inclusion/exclusion criteria; time first application, first time of first application of study drug; date of day 7, date of Visit 3 (day 7); premature discont., premature discontinuation (not efficacy related); administrative reasons including ‘lost to follow up’; * ‘severe’ violation of the VAS pain inclusion criterion (VAS

Figure 2

Pain Visual Analogue Scale score…

Figure 2

Pain Visual Analogue Scale score (percentage change from baseline; LOCF, Intent-To-Treat population). (A)…

Figure 2
Pain Visual Analogue Scale score (percentage change from baseline; LOCF, Intent-To-Treat population). (A) VAS pain: percentage change from baseline (ITT population). (B) Traumeel ointment vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. (C) Traumeel gel vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. ITT, Intent-To-Treat; LB, Lower bound of the one-sided confidence interval; LOCF, Last Observation Carried Forward; MW, Mann–Whitney estimator; P, p-value of one-sided Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test; T/R, valid number of participants in Traumeel (test) group/valid number of participants in diclofenac gel (reference) group; Tr, Traumeel; VAS, Visual Analogue Scale; VAS200LP, day 4; VAS300LP, day 7; VAS400LP, day 14; VAS500LP, day 42.

Figure 3

Foot and Ankle Ability Measure…

Figure 3

Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living subscale (changes from baseline;…

Figure 3
Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living subscale (changes from baseline; LOCF, Intent-To-Treat population). (A) FAAM ADL subscale: changes from baseline (ITT population). (B) Traumeel ointment vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. (C) Traumeel gel vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. FAAM ADL, Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living subscale; FADL200LC, day 4; FADL300LC, day 7; FADL400LC, day 14; FADL500LC, day 42; ITT, Intent-To-Treat; LB, Lower bound of the one-sided confidence interval; LOCF, Last Observation Carried Forward; MW, Mann–Whitney estimator; P, p-value of one-sided Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test; T/R, valid number of participants in Traumeel (test) group/valid number of participants in diclofenac gel (reference) group; Tr, Traumeel.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Pain Visual Analogue Scale score (percentage change from baseline; LOCF, Intent-To-Treat population). (A) VAS pain: percentage change from baseline (ITT population). (B) Traumeel ointment vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. (C) Traumeel gel vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. ITT, Intent-To-Treat; LB, Lower bound of the one-sided confidence interval; LOCF, Last Observation Carried Forward; MW, Mann–Whitney estimator; P, p-value of one-sided Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test; T/R, valid number of participants in Traumeel (test) group/valid number of participants in diclofenac gel (reference) group; Tr, Traumeel; VAS, Visual Analogue Scale; VAS200LP, day 4; VAS300LP, day 7; VAS400LP, day 14; VAS500LP, day 42.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living subscale (changes from baseline; LOCF, Intent-To-Treat population). (A) FAAM ADL subscale: changes from baseline (ITT population). (B) Traumeel ointment vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. (C) Traumeel gel vs. diclofenac gel: effect sizes (Mann–Whitney) and one-sided 97.5% CI. FAAM ADL, Foot and Ankle Ability Measure Activities of Daily Living subscale; FADL200LC, day 4; FADL300LC, day 7; FADL400LC, day 14; FADL500LC, day 42; ITT, Intent-To-Treat; LB, Lower bound of the one-sided confidence interval; LOCF, Last Observation Carried Forward; MW, Mann–Whitney estimator; P, p-value of one-sided Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test; T/R, valid number of participants in Traumeel (test) group/valid number of participants in diclofenac gel (reference) group; Tr, Traumeel.

References

    1. Woods C, Hawkins R, Hulse M, Hodson A. The football association medical research programme: an audit of injuries in professional football: an analysis of ankle sprains. Br J Sports Med. 2003;37:233–8.
    1. Ivins D. Acute ankle sprain: an update. Am Fam Physician. 2006;74:1714–20.
    1. Fong DTP, Hong Y, Chan LK, Shu-Hang Yung P, Chan KM. A systematic review on ankle injury and ankle sprain in sports. Sports Med. 2007;37:73–94.
    1. Wolfe MW, Uhl TL, Mattacola CG, McClusket LC. Management of ankle sprains. Am Fam Physician. 2001;63:93–104.
    1. Banning M. Topical diclofenac: clinical effectiveness and current uses in osteoarthritis of the knee and soft tissue injuries. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2008;9:2921–9.
    1. Zacher J, Altman R, Bellamy N, et al. Topical diclofenac and its role in pain and inflammation: an evidence-based review. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24:925–50.
    1. Massey T, Derry S, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Topical NSAIDs for acute pain in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;6:CD007402.
    1. Simon LS, Grierson LM, Naseer Z, Bookman AAM, Shainhouse JZ. Efficacy and safety of topical diclofenac containing dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) compared with those of topical placebo, DMSO vehicle and oral diclofenac for knee osteoarthritis. Pain. 2009;143:238–45.
    1. Taylor RS, Fotopoulos G, Maibach H. Safety profile of topical diclofenac: a meta-analysis of blinded, randomized, controlled trials in musculoskeletal conditions. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27:605–22.
    1. Schneider C. Traumeel – an emerging option to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the management of acute musculoskeletal injuries. Int J Gen Med. 2011;4:225–34.
    1. Zell J, Connert WD, Mau J, Feuerstake G. Behandlung von akuten Sprunggelenksdistorsionen: Doppelblindstudie zum Wirksamkeitsnachweis eines homöopathischen Salbenpräparats [Treatment of acute sprains of the ankle: controlled double-blind trial to test the effectiveness of a homeopathic preparation] Fortschr Med. 1988;106:96–100. Biol Ther English translation available in: 1989;VII(1):1–6.
    1. Böhmer D, Ambrus P. Treatment of sports injuries with Traumeel® ointment: a controlled double blind study. Biomed Ther. 1992;10:290–300.
    1. Thiel W. The treatment of recent traumatic blood effusions of the knee joint. Biol Ther. 1994;XII:242–8.
    1. Orizola AJ, Vargas F. The efficacy of Traumeel versus diclofenac and placebo ointment in tendinous pain in elite athletes: a randomized controlled trial. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(No 5, Supplement):S78. (Abstract 858)
    1. Schneider C, Schneider B, Hanisch J, van Haselen R. The role of a homoeopathic preparation compared with conventional therapy in the treatment of injuries: an observational cohort study. Complement Ther Med. 2008;16:22–7.
    1. Birnesser H, Oberbaum M, Klein P, Weiser M. The homeopathic preparation Traumeel compared with NSAIDs for symptomatic treatment of epicondylitis. J Musculoskel Res. 2004;8:119–28.
    1. Schneider C, Klein P, Stolt P, Oberbaum M. A homeopathic ointment preparation compared with 1% diclofenac gel for acute symptomatic treatment of tendinopathy. Explore. 2005;1:446–52.
    1. Zenner S, Weiser M. Oral treatment of traumatic, inflammatory, and degenerative conditions with a homeopathic remedy. Biomed Ther. 1997;XV:22–6.
    1. Zenner S, Metelmann H. Application possibilities of Traumeel S injection solution: results of multi-centric drug monitoring trial conducted on 3,241 patients. Biol Ther. 1992;X:301–10.
    1. Zenner S, Metelmann H. Therapy experience with a homeopathic ointment: results of drug surveillance conducted on 3,422 patients. Biol Ther. 1994;XII:204–11.
    1. Arora S, Harris T, Scherer C. Clinical safety of a homeopathic preparation. Biomed Ther. 2000;XVIII:222–5.
    1. 2011. MeReC rapid review (accessed September 2012)
    1. United States National Library of Medicine. Diclofenac (accessed January 2013)
    1. Bauer P, Köhne K. Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. Biometrics. 1994;50:1929–41.
    1. Martin R, Irrgang J, Burdett R, Conti SF, van Swearingen JM. Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26:968–83.
    1. Esterson PS. Measurement of ankle joint swelling using a figure of 8. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1979;1:51–2.
    1. Colditz GA, Miller JN, Mosteller F. Measuring gain in the evaluation of medical technology. The probability of a better outcome. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1988;4:637–42.
    1. Maurer W, Hothorn LA, Lehmacher W. In: Biometrie in der chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie. Vollmar J, editor. Stuttgart, Germany: Gustav Fischer; 1995. pp. 3–18.
    1. European Medicines Agency September 1998 CPMP/ICH/363/96. ICH Topic E 9 Statistical principles for clinical trials. Step 5. Note for guidance on statistical principles for clinical trials (CPMP/ICH/363/96). . (accessed January 2013)
    1. Gillings O, Koch G. The application of the principle of intention-to-treat to the analysis of clinical trials. Drug Inform J. 1991;25:411–24.
    1. Bretz F, Schmidli H, Koenig F, et al. Confirmatory seamless phase II/III clinical trials with hypotheses selection at interim: general concepts. Biometrical J. 2006;48:623–34.
    1. Fligner MA, Wolfe DA. Distribution-free tests for comparing several treatments with a control. Stat Neerl. 1982;36:119–27.
    1. Wexler RK. The injured ankle. Am Fam Physician. 1998;57:474–80.
    1. Lussignoli S, Bertani S, Metelmann H, Bellavite P, Conforti A. Effect of Traumeel S®, a homeopathic formulation, on blood-induced inflammation in rats. Complement Ther Med. 1999;7:225–30.
    1. Heine H, Andrä F. The antiinflammatory action mechanism of an antihomotoxic composite remedy. Ärztezeitschrift für Naturheilverfahren. 2002;43:96–104.
    1. Rabeneck L, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI. Problems in the conduct and analysis of randomized clinical trials: are we getting the right answers to the wrong questions? Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:507–12.
    1. Fisher P, van Haselen R, Hardy K, Berkovitz S, McCarney R. Effectiveness gaps: a new concept for evaluating health service and research needs applied to complementary and alternative medicine. J Altern Complement Med. 2004;10:627–32.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir