X-ray

Philipp Klemm et al. (2026) · European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine

This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial of 38 analyzed adults in Bad Nauheim, Germany, explored whether mineral water baths for the hands ease pain from hand osteoarthritis (HOA). HOA is wear-and-tear damage in the finger and thumb joints that causes pain, stiffness and reduced grip. Balneotherapy, the treatment of conditions with natural mineral waters, is well known for knee osteoarthritis, but evidence for hand osteoarthritis was thin. The tested water was natural thermal brine, a salty spring water (sodium chloride and hydrogen carbonate, rich in carbon dioxide), used at its natural 25 degrees C. Participants averaged 72 years, 86% were women, and all had painful, X-ray-confirmed HOA. One group soaked both hands in thermal brine and the other in ordinary tap water at the same temperature, in identical covered bowls so neither participants nor staff knew which was which. Each bath lasted 15 minutes, with six baths over three weeks. Pain was rated on a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS, 0 meaning no pain), alongside hand function questionnaires, grip strength, skin blood flow and a blood marker (VEGF). After six baths, pain averaged 7 mm with thermal brine versus 33 mm with tap water, a 26.4 mm gap (P < 0.0001) larger than the 20 mm threshold for a clinically meaningful change. The gap was already present after the first bath (5.3 mm, P = 0.0017) and was still about 26 to 27 mm at 4 and 12 weeks. Pain on the hand index (AUSCAN pain subscore) was also lower (5.86 points, P < 0.0001), though that difference was gone at follow-up. Stiffness, function, grip strength, skin blood flow and VEGF did not differ between groups. Satisfaction favored thermal brine: 72% (13 of 18) rated pain relief good or very good versus 32% (6 of 19) with tap water. No adverse events occurred. The trial was small, ran at one center during the COVID-19 pandemic, and lost 12 of 50 participants, so only 38 were analyzed. Tap water may also have effects of its own. Because blood flow and VEGF showed no change, how the baths relieve pain remains unexplained; the authors note that 25 degrees C is below the 32 to 35 degrees C range where carbon dioxide baths are expected to widen blood vessels. They propose thermal brine baths as a non-pharmacological adjunct and call for larger multicenter trials with longer treatment and optimized temperatures.

Jian-Feng Tu et al. (2022) · JAMA network open

This randomized trial with 80 emergency department patients explored whether adding acupuncture to a standard painkiller injection brings faster relief from renal colic, the severe cramping flank pain that occurs when a kidney stone blocks or moves through the urinary tract. Renal colic is described by the authors as one of the worst types of pain, and the guideline first-choice drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicines such as diclofenac, take time to work: in an earlier study, 37.5% of patients still had moderate or severe pain 15 minutes after an injection. Acupuncture, a traditional Chinese medicine technique that inserts thin needles at specific body points, had shown quick pain reduction in other settings. Adults aged 18 to 75 with stone-related renal colic and pain of at least 4 out of 10 on a visual analog scale (a line on which patients mark their pain) were treated at a Beijing hospital emergency department in 2020. Everyone received a 50 mg diclofenac injection into the muscle. Half then had 30 minutes of needling at Yaotongdian, a point on the back of each hand, with the needles twisted and lifted until a soreness or heaviness sensation (called De qi) appeared. The other half had shallow needle pricks at forearm spots that are not acupuncture points. Ten minutes after needling, 77.5% of the acupuncture group (31 of 40) had at least halved their pain score, compared with 10.0% of the sham group (4 of 40), a gap of 67.5 percentage points (P < .001, so chance is very unlikely to explain it). Average pain fell to 3.0 versus 5.9 out of 10. Acupuncture also led at 0, 5, 15, 20 and 30 minutes (97.5% vs 80.0% at 30 minutes; P = .03). Patients, assessors and the statistician did not know the group, and patients guessed their group about equally often in both arms (P = .48). The advantage faded as the injection took effect: by 45 and 60 minutes both groups had about 92% to 98% responding (P = .62), and only 1 patient needed stronger rescue medication. No adverse events were recorded. The authors suggest acupuncture may serve as an optional add-on for faster relief, since it uses a single point and needs no individual diagnosis. They attribute the absence of a rescue-medication difference to a possible ceiling effect from the diclofenac. They note limitations plainly: one hospital, treatment given after diagnostic imaging, experienced acupuncturists who could not be blinded, and no follow-up of pain beyond 60 minutes or analysis by stone size. They plan to study acupuncture before imaging.

Hazel J Jenkins et al. (2026) · Chiropractic & manual therapies

This pilot randomised trial with 20 patients and 11 chiropractors explored whether it is practical to run a large study asking a simple question: does taking spinal x-rays change outcomes for people receiving chiropractic care for back or neck pain? In medical settings, trials have found routine imaging does not improve non-specific low back pain, yet chiropractors use x-rays at widely varying rates (8% to 84%), partly to screen for reasons spinal manipulation might be unsuitable. No randomised trial had tested imaging where manipulation is also part of care, so the authors first tested whether such a trial could work. Chiropractors in Sydney, Australia, invited adults with a new episode of spinal pain, where the chiropractor was unsure whether an x-ray was needed. A computer randomly assigned each consenting patient to get spinal radiographs or not, and everything else, including manipulation, was decided between chiropractor and patient. Pain, disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire for the back, Neck Disability Index), satisfaction and side effects were collected at 2, 6 and 12 weeks, and chiropractors were interviewed about the experience. Recruitment was the main difficulty: 135 patients were screened, 33 (24%) were eligible and 20 took part, short of the 50 planned. Three of 10 patients assigned to imaging did not get it, and 2 of 10 assigned to no imaging did, always after a clinical change. Follow-up fell from 90% of patients at 2 weeks to 75% at 12 weeks. Pain and disability fell in both groups, but differences between groups were small and the trial was too small to compare them. Mild, short-lived side effects such as muscle soreness affected 4 of 20 participants (1 imaging, 3 no imaging). The authors judged that most criteria for a larger trial were met but recruitment and cross-over would need strategies, since COVID-19, time pressure and discomfort explaining diagnostic uncertainty to patients limited enrolment. Limitations include a self-selected group of chiropractors, probably non-consecutive recruitment and mostly young, low-disability participants.

Janmejaya Samal (2015) · Journal of intercultural ethnopharmacology

This systematic review pooled published research on using Ayurveda, India's traditional medical system, alongside standard drugs for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) — a bacterial lung infection that remains one of India's leading causes of death. The review searched PubMed through April 2015 and found six studies worth including: four human trials testing Ayurvedic herbal formulas as add-ons to standard anti-TB drugs (ATDs), and two lab studies testing plant extracts directly against the TB bacterium. In Ayurveda, PTB is traditionally understood as Rajayakshma, a wasting condition tied to depleted bodily tissues (dhatu) and vital reserve (ojas) — explaining why many of the formulas studied are rejuvenative "Rasayana" tonics rather than antibiotics. The four clinical trials enrolled 30 to 133 PTB patients each, all in India, and ran from 28 days to 6-8 months. Participants took Ayurvedic formulas — a nine-herb Rasayana capsule, a liquid tonic called Bhringarajasava, Ashwagandha with Chyawanprash, or a hepatoprotective blend called Liv-600 — alongside their prescribed drug regimen (DOTS). Researchers tracked symptoms like cough and fever, body weight, X-ray changes, drug blood levels, and liver enzymes. The two lab studies tested leaf and plant extracts against TB bacteria in culture, measuring the lowest concentration that stopped bacterial growth. Across the trials, Ayurvedic add-ons consistently eased symptoms and supported weight gain more than standard treatment alone (p<0.001 in the largest trial). One striking finding: Ashwagandha plus Chyawanprash raised blood levels of two key TB drugs, isoniazid and pyrazinamide, by 7-10% (meaning the body absorbed more of the medicine that actually kills the bacteria) — potentially valuable given rising drug resistance. The hepatoprotective blend showed no harmful rise in liver enzymes, suggesting it may guard against the liver damage these drugs can cause. In the lab, extracts from four of five tested legumes completely stopped bacterial growth at a low concentration (50 micrograms per milliliter), and extracts from five other plants inhibited even drug-resistant TB strains by up to 95%. These findings position Ayurvedic formulas as promising supportive care — easing symptoms, protecting the liver, and possibly boosting drug absorption — rather than replacements for standard TB treatment, which no study tested. The evidence base is thin: only six studies total, all small, mostly from India, with just one describing blinding and none pooling results statistically. The authors call for properly designed clinical trials of the lab-active plants, especially against multidrug-resistant TB. The evidence reviewed concerns Ayurvedic preparations as adjuncts to prescribed drug therapy; none of it addresses their use instead of it.

Filip Gedin et al. (2025) · BMC musculoskeletal disorders

This Swedish trial asked whether a chiropractor, a physiotherapist, or advice to stay active works best for low back pain lasting months — and the honest answer is that it could not tell the three apart. Eighty-eight people at ten primary care clinics around Stockholm were randomly assigned to one of four things: advice only, physiotherapy, chiropractic care, or both together. Six months later, everyone was better. Disability scores dropped in every group — most in the chiropractic group, least in the physiotherapy group — but the gaps between groups were well within what chance alone would produce. Pain scores and quality of life told the same story: improvement everywhere, no clear winner. Where the groups did differ was cost. The advice-only group ended up costing the health system about three times more than the others — around SEK 11,000 per person versus roughly SEK 3,000 — mostly because those patients went on to see doctors more, and one of them had spine surgery. Getting hands-on treatment early appeared to head off more expensive care later, though with numbers this small a single surgery moves the whole average. Combining chiropractic care with physiotherapy came out best on the economics: slightly more quality-adjusted life years for slightly less money. But "slightly" is doing a lot of work — the difference across all four groups was eight thousandths of a QALY, which is roughly three days of perfect health. The researchers are unusually candid about the limits. They wanted far more participants than they got, nearly half the people dropped out before six months, and the four groups were not well matched at the start. They present this as a lesson for whoever runs the definitive trial next, not as a result to act on. What it does support, gently: for chronic low back pain, staying active matters, and both chiropractic care and physiotherapy are reasonable, comparably effective options — with some signal that getting treatment rather than advice alone may save money downstream.