The effects of topical and oral Nigella sativa oil on clinical findings in knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial

Abstract

IntroductionThe objective of this trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of topical and oral application of Nigella sativa (N.Sativa) oil compared to the placebo in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients. MethodsPatients with mild to moderate KOA were enrolled in this double-blind randomized controlled trial and randomly assigned to receive oral (2.5 ml of N. Sativa oil twice a day) or topical N.Sativa oil (2.5 ml of N.Sativa oil three times a day) or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary outcome measures were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analogue scale (VAS), and timed up & go test (TUG) scores. The secondary outcome measures were WOMAC subscale (pain, stiffness, and limitations of physical function) scores. ResultsIn total, 40 patients completed the study. VAS, WOMAC pain, WOMAC limitations of physical function and WOMAC total score improved significantly in the oral and topical N.Sativa groups. However, VAS (4.60 ± 1.79–2.53 ± 2.03) and WOMAC pain (6.90 ± 3.34–3.86 ± 2.52) improved more significantly only in the Topical N.Sativa group compared to the placebo group (p = 0.005 and p = 0.015). Additionally, topical N.Sativa oil was more efficient than oral N.Sativa oil in improving WOMAC limitations of physical function (26.73 ± 10.29–11.73 ± 6.74 vs. 27.41 ± 10.79–19.35 ± 9.11, respectively) and WOMAC total scores 35.70 ± 13.63–17.13 ± 9.80 vs. 38.47 ± 15.03–27.35 ± 12.76, respectively) in patients (all p-values<0.05). ConclusionsTopical application of N.Sativa oil was more efficient than the oral intake of N.Sativa oil in improving WOMAC total and limitations of physical function scores in patients with KOA.