Background: Osteoarthritis is a major public health concern. Despite existing evidence-based treatment options, the health care situation remains unsatisfactory. Digital care options, especially when combined with in-person sessions, seem to be promising. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the needs, preconditions, barriers, and facilitators of blended physical therapy for osteoarthritis. Methods: This Delphi study consisted of interviews, an online questionnaire, and focus groups. Participants were physical therapists, patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis with or without experience in digital care, and stakeholders of the health care system. In the first phase, interviews were conducted with patients and physical therapists. The interview guide was based on the Consolidated Framework For Implementation Research. The interviews focused on experiences with digital and blended care. Furthermore, needs, facilitators, and barriers were discussed. In the second phase, an online questionnaire and focus groups served the process to confirm the needs and collect preconditions. The online questionnaire contained statements drawn by the results of the interviews. Patients and physical therapists were invited to complete the questionnaire and participate in one of the three focus groups including (1) patients; (2) physical therapists; and (3) a patient, a physical therapist, and stakeholders from the health care system. The focus groups were used to determine concordance with the results of the interviews and the online questionnaire. Results: Nine physical therapists, seven patients, and six stakeholders confirmed that an increase of acceptance of the digital care part by physical therapists and patients is crucial. One of the most frequently mentioned facilitators was conducting regular in-person sessions. Physical therapists and patients concluded that blended physical therapy must be tailored to the patients' needs. Participants of the last focus group stated that the reimbursement of blended physical therapy needs to be clarified. Conclusions: Most importantly, it is necessary to strengthen the acceptance of patients and physical therapists toward digital care. Overall, fo
LINK
ObjectiveFirst, to make an inventory of activity limitations commonly reported by knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients undergoing multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Second, to evaluate treatment outcome using the Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) and compare it to the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index physical function subscale (WOMAC-pf).DesignAn observational study with assessments before and immediately after multidisciplinary rehabilitation. Five hundred and thirteen patients used the PSFS, a patient-reported tool to identify activity limitations and score the patient's ability to perform the activity on an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), to report three activities in which they were limited. Frequencies and percentages of their highest-prioritized activity were calculated and categorized according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Paired-samples T-tests were used to analyze the change in ability to perform the activities. Effect sizes of PSFS and WOMAC-pf were compared.ResultsMost patients indicated limitations in walking, walking up/down stairs, prolonged standing, and standing up from a chair. Following these common activities, 26 different activities were identified. The majority of these highest-prioritized activities fell under the first-level ICF category of Mobility. The ability to perform all activities significantly improved after treatment. Effect sizes ranged between 0.60 and 0.97 and were greater than the effect size of the WOMAC-pf (0.41).ConclusionKnee OA patients who undergo multidisciplinary rehabilitation exhibit improvements in performing daily activities. The PSFS is a valuable tool to evaluate patient-specific activity limitations and seems to capture improvements in activity limitations beyond the WOMAC-pf.
ObjectiveTo investigate whether duration of knee symptoms influenced the magnitude of the effect of exercise therapy compared to non-exercise control interventions on pain and physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA).MethodWe undertook an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis utilising IPD stored within the OA Trial Bank from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing exercise to non-exercise control interventions among people with knee OA. IPD from RCTs were analysed to determine the treatment effect by considering both study-level and individual-level covariates in the multilevel regression model. To estimate the interaction effect (i.e., treatment x duration of symptoms (dichotomised)), on self-reported pain or physical function (standardised to 0–100 scale), a one-stage multilevel regression model was applied.ResultsWe included IPD from 1767 participants with knee OA from 10 RCTs. Significant interaction effects between the study arm and symptom duration (≤1 year vs >1 year, and ≤2 years vs>2 years) were found for short- (∼3 months) (Mean Difference (MD) −3.57, 95%CI −6.76 to −0.38 and −4.12, 95% CI-6.58 to −1.66, respectively) and long-term (∼12 months) pain outcomes (MD −8.33, 95%CI −12.51 to −4.15 and −8.00, 95%CI −11.21 to −4.80, respectively), and long-term function outcomes (MD −5.46, 95%CI −9.22 to −1.70 and −4.56 95%CI −7.33 to-1.80, respectively).ConclusionsThis IPD meta-analysis demonstrated that people with a relatively short symptom duration benefit more from therapeutic exercise than those with a longer symptom duration. Therefore, there seems to be a window of opportunity to target therapeutic exercise in knee OA.
