Effect of optically modified polyethylene terephthalate fiber socks on chronic foot pain

Robyn M B York, Ian L Gordon, Robyn M B York, Ian L Gordon

Abstract

Background: Increasing experimental and clinical evidence suggests that illumination of the skin with relatively low intensity light may lead to therapeutic results such as reduced pain or improved wound healing. The goal of this study was to evaluate prospectively whether socks made from polyethylene terephthalate (PET) incorporating optically active particles (Celliant) ameliorates chronic foot pain resulting from diabetic neuropathy or other disorders. Such optically modified fiber is thought to modify the illumination of the skin in the visible and infrared portions of the spectrum, and consequently reduce pain.

Methods: A double-blind, randomized trial with 55 subjects (38 men, 17 women) enrolled (average age 59.7 +/- 11.9 years), 26 with diabetic neuropathy and 29 with other pain etiologies. Subjects twice completed the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and SF-36 a week apart (W(1+2)) before receiving either control or Celliant socks. The same questionnaires were answered again one and two weeks (W(3+4)) later. The questionnaires provided nine scores for analyzing pain reduction: one VAS score, two BPI scores, five MPQ scores, and the bodily pain score on the SF-36. Mean W(1+2) and W(3+4) scores were compared to measure pain reduction.

Results: More pain reduction was reported by Celliant subjects for 8 of the 9 pain questions employed, with a significant (p = 0.043) difference between controls and Celliant for McGill question III. In neuropathic subjects, Celliant caused more pain reduction in 6 of the 9 questions, but not significantly. In non-neuropathic subjects 8 of 9 questions showed more pain reduction with the Celliant socks.

Conclusion: Socks with optically modified PET (Celliant) appear to have a beneficial impact on chronic foot pain. The mechanism could be related to the effects seen with illumination of tissues with visible and infrared light.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00458497.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Results of McGill Question III. The difference between mean W1+2 and mean W3+4 scores is depicted. Solid bars report Celliant™ and stipled bars report control subjects. *p < 0.05.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results of the Brief Pain Inventory – Pain Severity. The difference between mean W1+2 and mean W3+4 scores is depicted. Solid bars report Celliant™ and stipled bars report control subjects.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Results of the VAS. The difference between mean W1+2 and mean W3+4 scores is depicted. Solid bars report Celliant™ and stipled bars report control subjects.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Results of the SF-36 Bodily Pain. The difference between mean W1+2 and mean W3+4 scores is depicted. Solid bars report Celliant™ and stipled bars report control subjects.

References

    1. Cleeland CS, Ryan KM. Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singap. 1994;23:129–138.
    1. Farrar JT, Young JP, Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
    1. Gilron I, Bailey JM, Tu D, Holden RR, Weaver DF, Houlden RL. Morphine, gabapentin, or their combination for neuropathic pain. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1324–1334. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa042580.
    1. Melzack R. The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain. 1987;30:191–197. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(87)91074-8.
    1. Tan G, Jesen M. Validation of the Brief Pain Inventory for chronic nonmalignant pain. J Pain. 2004;5:133–137. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2003.12.005.
    1. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosisnki M, Gandek B. SF-36 health survey manual and interpretation guide. Boston, The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.
    1. Wernicke JF, Pritchett YL, D'Souza DN, Waninger A, Tran P, Iyengar S, Raskin J. A randomized controlled trial of duloxetine in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Neurology. 2006;67:1411–1420. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000240225.04000.1a.
    1. Fikackova H, Dostalova T, Vosicka R, Peterova V, Navratil L, Lesak J. Arthralgia of the temporomandibular joint and low-level laser therapy. Photomed Laser Surg. 2006;24:522–527. doi: 10.1089/pho.2006.24.522.
    1. Bjordal JM, Couppe C, Chow RT, Tuner J, Ljunggren EA. A systematic review of low level laser therapy with location-specific doses for pain from chronic joint disorders. Aust J Physiother. 2003;49:107–116.
    1. Vinck E, Coorevits P, Cagnie B, De Muynck M, Vanderstraeten G, Cambier D. Evidence of changes in sural nerve conduction mediated by light emitting diode irradiation. Lasers Med Sci. 2005;20:35–40. doi: 10.1007/s10103-005-0333-2.
    1. Leonard DR, Farooqi MH, Myers S. Restoration of sensation, reduced pain, and improved balance in subjects with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study with monochromatic near-infrared treatment. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:168–172. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.1.168.
    1. Harkless LB, DeLellis S, Carnegie DH, Burke TJ. Improved foot sensitivity and pain reduction in patients with peripheral neuropathy after treatment with monochromatic infrared photo energy – MIRE. J Diabetes Complications. 2006;20:81–87. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2005.06.002.
    1. Hancock CM, Riegger-Krugh C. Modulation of pain in osteoarthritis: The role of nitric oxide. Clin J Pain. 2008;24:353–365.
    1. Djavid GE, Mehrdad R, Ghasemi M, Hasan-Zadeh H, Sotoodeh-Manesh A, Pouryaghoub G. In chronic low back pain, low level laser therapy combined with exercise is more beneficial than exercise alone in the long term: a randomized trial. Aust J Physiother. 2007;52:155–160.
    1. Stergioulas A, Stergioula M, Aarskog R, Lopes-Martins RAB, Bjordal JM. Effects of low-level laser therapy and eccentric exercises in the treatment of recreational athletes with chronic Achilles tendonopathy. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:881–887. doi: 10.1177/0363546507312165.
    1. Enwemeka CS, Parker JC, Dowdy DS, Harkness LE, Woodruff LD. The efficacy of low-power lasers in tissue repair and pain control: a meta-analysis study. Photomed Laser Surg. 2004;22:323–329. doi: 10.1089/pho.2004.22.323.
    1. Erdle BJ, Brouxhon S, Kaplan M, Vanbuskirk J, Pentland AP. Effect of continuous-wave (670-nm) red light on wound healing. Dermatol Surg. 2008;34:320–325. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4725.2007.34065.x.
    1. Mendez TMTV, Pinheiro ALB, Pacheco MTT, Nascimento PM, Ramalho LMP. Dose and wavelength of laser light have influence on the repair of cutaneous wounds. J Clin Laser Med Surg. 2004;22:19–25. doi: 10.1089/104454704773660930.
    1. Rabelo SB, Villaverde AB, Nicolau RA, Castillo Salgado MA, Melo MDS, Pacheco MTT. Comparison between wound healing in induced diabetic and nondiabetic rats after low-level laser therapy. Photomed Laser Surg. 2006;24:474–479. doi: 10.1089/pho.2006.24.474.
    1. Schramm JM, Warner D, Hardesty RA, Oberg KC. A unique combination of infrared and microwave radiation accelerates wound healing. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;111:258–266. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200301000-00044.
    1. Hawkins D, Abrahamse H. Influence of broad-spectrum and infrared light in combination with laser irradiation on the proliferation of wounded skin fibroblasts. Photomed Laser Surg. 2007;25:159–169. doi: 10.1089/pho.2007.2010.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する