Exploring determinants predicting response to intra-articular hyaluronic acid treatment in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: 9-year follow-up data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative

Table 3 Concomitant arthritis medication at T0

	Total (n = 404)^a	Low,^b 0 < WOMAC pain^c < 4 (n = 118)	Moderate, 4 ≤ WOMAC pain^c ≤ 7 (n = 150)	High, WOMAC pain^c ≥ 8 (n = 136)	Low vs High p value^d	Moderate vs High p value^d
	(n = 311)	(n = 89)	(n = 119)	(n = 103)
NSAIDs ± analgesics	74% (230)	74% (66)	69% (82)	80% (82)	0.370	0.070
	(n = 311)	(n = 89)	(n = 119)	(n = 103)
Anti-bone remodeling	17% (52)	18% (16)	18% (22)	14% (14)	0.404	0.324
	(n = 404)	(n = 118)	(n = 150)	(n = 136)
Steroid injections	18% (72)	12% (14)	17% (26)	24% (32)	0.016	0.193
	(n = 400)	(n = 117)	(n = 148)	(n = 135)
Glucosamine ± chondroitin sulfate	49% (194)	56% (65)	52% (77)	39% (52)	0.007	0.023

Results are shown as % and number (n) of participants’ IAHA injected knees. Bold data are significant at p < 0.05
T0 visit before IAHA treatment, NSAID nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, IAHA intra-articular hyaluronic acid, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index
^aNumber of injected knees based on 310 participants
^bThe level of pain on WOMAC score was divided into three groups (Low, Moderate, and High) based on tertile analysis
^cWOMAC Likert 3.1 (scale 0–20) pain scores at T0. Participants with WOMAC pain score = 0 were excluded from analysis
^dProportions compared using the chi-squared test/Fisher’s exact test

ISSN: 1478-6362