E-Exercise is an effective 12-week blended intervention consisting of around five face-to-face physiotherapy sessions and a web-based application for patients with hip/knee osteoarthritis. In order to facilitate effective implementation of e-Exercise, this study aims to identify physiotherapists' experiences and determinants related to the usage of e-Exercise. Methods: An explanatory sequential mixed methods design embedded in a randomized controlled trial comparing e-Exercise with usual physiotherapy in patients with hip/knee osteoarthritis. Usage of e-Exercise was based on recruitment rates of 123 physiotherapists allocated to e-Exercise and objective web-based application usage data. Experiences and determinants related to e-Exercise usage were investigated with a questionnaire and clarified with semi-structured interviews. Results: Of the 123 physiotherapists allocated to e-Exercise, 54 recruited more than one eligible patient, of whom 10 physiotherapists continued using e-Exercise after the study period. Physiotherapists had mixed experiences with e-Exercise. Determinants related to intervention usage were appropriateness, added value, time, workload, professional autonomy, environmental factors, and financial consequences. Physiotherapists recommended to improve the ability to tailor e-Exercise to the individual needs of the patient patients' individual needs. Discussion: Determinants related to the usage of e-Exercise provided valuable information for the implementation of e-Exercise on broader scale. Most importantly, the flexibility of e-Exercise needs to be improved. Next, there is a need for education on how to integrate an online program within physiotherapy
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Hip and knee osteoarthritis are associated with functional limitations, pain and restrictions in quality of life and the ability to work. Furthermore, with growing prevalence, osteoarthritis is increasingly causing (in)direct costs. Guidelines recommend exercise therapy and education as primary treatment strategies. Available options for treatment based on physical activity promotion and lifestyle change are often insufficiently provided and used. In addition, the quality of current exercise programmes often does not meet the changing care needs of older people with comorbidities and exercise adherence is a challenge beyond personal physiotherapy. The main objective of this study is to investigate the short- and long-term (cost-)effectiveness of the SmArt-E programme in people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain and physical functioning compared to usual care. Methods: This study is designed as a multicentre randomized controlled trial with a target sample size of 330 patients. The intervention is based on the e-Exercise intervention from the Netherlands, consists of a training and education programme and is conducted as a blended care intervention over 12 months. We use an app to support independent training and the development of self-management skills. The primary and secondary hypotheses are that participants in the SmArt-E intervention will have less pain (numerical rating scale) and better physical functioning (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) compared to participants in the usual care group after 12 and 3 months. Other secondary outcomes are based on domains of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI). The study will be accompanied by a process evaluation. Discussion: After a positive evaluation, SmArt-E can be offered in usual care, flexibly addressing different care situations. The desired sustainability and the support of the participants' behavioural change are initiated via the app through audio-visual contact with their physiotherapists. Furthermore, the app supports the repetition and consolidation of learned training and educational content. For people with osteoarthritis, the new form of care with proven effectiveness can lead to a reduction in underuse and misuse of care as well as contribute to a reduction in (in)direct costs.
LINK
Background: Osteoarthritis is one of the most common chronic joint diseases, mostly affecting the knee or hip through pain, joint stiffness and decreased physical functioning in daily life. Regular physical activity (PA) can help preserve and improve physical functioning and reduce pain in patients with osteoarthritis. Interventions aiming to improve movement behaviour can be optimized by tailoring them to a patients' starting point; their current movement behaviour. Movement behaviour needs to be assessed in its full complexity, and therefore a multidimensional description is needed. Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify subgroups based on movement behaviour patterns in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who are eligible for a PA intervention. Second, differences between subgroups regarding Body Mass Index, sex, age, physical functioning, comorbidities, fatigue and pain were determined between subgroups. Methods: Baseline data of the clinical trial 'e-Exercise Osteoarthritis', collected in Dutch primary care physical therapy practices were analysed. Movement behaviour was assessed with ActiGraph GT3X and GT3X+ accelerometers. Groups with similar patterns were identified using a hierarchical cluster analysis, including six clustering variables indicating total time in and distribution of PA and sedentary behaviours. Differences in clinical characteristics between groups were assessed via Kruskall Wallis and Chi2 tests. Results: Accelerometer data, including all daily activities during 3 to 5 subsequent days, of 182 patients (average age 63 years) with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis were analysed. Four patterns were identified: inactive & sedentary, prolonged sedentary, light active and active. Physical functioning was less impaired in the group with the active pattern compared to the inactive & sedentary pattern. The group with the prolonged sedentary pattern experienced lower levels of pain and fatigue and higher levels of physical functioning compared to the light active and compared to the inactive & sedentary. Conclusions: Four subgroups with substantially different movement behaviour patterns and clinical characteristics can be identified in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee. Knowledge about these subgroups can be used to personalize future movement behaviour interventions for this population.
LINK
Background The gait modification strategies Trunk Lean and Medial Thrust have been shown to reduce the external knee adduction moment (EKAM) in patients with knee osteoarthritis which could contribute to reduced progression of the disease. Which strategy is most optimal differs between individuals, but the underlying mechanism that causes this remains unknown. Research question Which gait parameters determine the optimal gait modification strategy for individual patients with knee osteoarthritis? Methods Forty-seven participants with symptomatic medial knee osteoarthritis underwent 3-dimensional motion analysis during comfortable gait and with two gait modification strategies: Medial Thrust and Trunk Lean. Kinematic and kinetic variables were calculated. Participants were then categorized into one of the two subgroups, based on the modification strategy that reduced the EKAM the most for them. Multiple logistic regression analysis with backward elimination was used to investigate the predictive nature of dynamic parameters obtained during comfortable walking on the optimal modification gait strategy. Results For 68.1 % of the participants, Trunk Lean was the optimal strategy in reducing the EKAM. Baseline characteristics, kinematics and kinetics did not differ significantly between subgroups during comfortable walking. Changes to frontal trunk and tibia angles correlated significantly with EKAM reduction during the Trunk Lean and Medial Thrust strategies, respectively. Regression analysis showed that MT is likely optimal when the frontal tibia angle range of motion and peak knee flexion angle in early stance during comfortable walking are high (R2Nagelkerke = 0.12). Significance Our regression model based solely on kinematic parameters from comfortable walking contained characteristics of the frontal tibia angle and knee flexion angle. As the model explains only 12.3 % of variance, clinical application does not seem feasible. Direct assessment of kinetics seems to be the most optimal strategy for selecting the most optimal gait modification strategy for individual patients with knee osteoarthritis.
MULTIFILE
Background: Many international clinical guidelines recommend therapeutic exercise as a core treatment for knee and hip osteoarthritis. We aimed to identify individual patient-level moderators of the effect of therapeutic exercise for reducing pain and improving physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, or both. Methods: We did a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing therapeutic exercise with non-exercise controls in people with knee osteoathritis, hip osteoarthritis, or both. We searched ten databases from March 1, 2012, to Feb 25, 2019, for randomised controlled trials comparing the effects of exercise with non-exercise or other exercise controls on pain and physical function outcomes among people with knee osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, or both. IPD were requested from leads of all eligible randomised controlled trials. 12 potential moderators of interest were explored to ascertain whether they were associated with short-term (12 weeks), medium-term (6 months), and long-term (12 months) effects of exercise on self-reported pain and physical function, in comparison with non-exercise controls. Overall intervention effects were also summarised. This study is prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017054049). Findings: Of 91 eligible randomised controlled trials that compared exercise with non-exercise controls, IPD from 31 randomised controlled trials (n=4241 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Randomised controlled trials included participants with knee osteoarthritis (18 [58%] of 31 trials), hip osteoarthritis (six [19%]), or both (seven [23%]) and tested heterogeneous exercise interventions versus heterogeneous non-exercise controls, with variable risk of bias. Summary meta-analysis results showed that, on average, compared with non-exercise controls, therapeutic exercise reduced pain on a standardised 0–100 scale (with 100 corresponding to worst pain), with a difference of –6·36 points (95% CI –8·45 to –4·27, borrowing of strength [BoS] 10·3%, between-study variance [τ2] 21·6) in the short term, –3·77 points (–5·97 to –1·57, BoS 30·0%, τ2 14·4) in the medium term, and –3·43 points (–5·18 to –1·69, BoS 31·7%, τ2 4·5) in the long term. Therapeutic exercise also improved physical function on a standardised 0–100 scale (with 100 corresponding to worst physical function), with a difference of –4·46 points in the short term (95% CI –5·95 to –2·98, BoS 10·5%, τ2 10·1), –2·71 points in the medium term (–4·63 to –0·78, BoS 33·6%, τ2 11·9), and –3·39 points in the long term (–4·97 to –1·81, BoS 34·1%, τ2 6·4). Baseline pain and physical function moderated the effect of exercise on pain and physical function outcomes. Those with higher self-reported pain and physical function scores at baseline (ie, poorer physical function) generally benefited more than those with lower self-reported pain and physical function scores at baseline, with the evidence most certain in the short term (12 weeks). Interpretation: There was evidence of a small, positive overall effect of therapeutic exercise on pain and physical function compared with non-exercise controls. However, this effect is of questionable clinical importance, particularly in the medium and long term. As individuals with higher pain severity and poorer physical function at baseline benefited more than those with lower pain severity and better physical function at baseline, targeting individuals with higher levels of osteoarthritis-related pain and disability for therapeutic exercise might be of merit. Funding: Chartered Society of Physiotherapy Charitable Trust and the National Institute for Health and Care Research.
DOCUMENT
ObjectiveThe Joint Effort Initiative (JEI) is an international collaboration of clinicians, researchers, and consumer organisations with a shared vision of improving the implementation of osteoarthritis management programs (OAMPs). This study aimed to identify JEI's future priorities and guide direction. DesignA two-part international survey to prioritise topics of importance to our membership and research stakeholders. Survey one presented a list of 40 topics under 5 themes. Consenting participants were asked to choose their top three topics in each theme. A short list of 25 topics was presented in survey two. Participants were asked to rank the importance (100-point NRS scale, 100 = highest priority). Response frequency (median, IQR) was used to rank the top priorities by theme. Results Ninety-five participants completed survey one (61% female, 48% clinicians) and 57 completed survey two. The top ranked topic/s were: i. Promotion and advocacy: support training for health professionals (median 85, IQR 24). ii. Education and training: incorporating behaviour change into OAMPs (80, 16), advanced OA skills (80, 30), and integration of OA education into clinical training (80, 36). iii. Improving OAMPs delivery: regular updates on changes to best-evidence OA care (84, 24). iv. Future research: improve uptake of exercise, physical activity, and weight-loss (89, 16). v. Enhancing relationships, alliances, and shared knowledge: promote research collaborations (81, 30), share challenges and opportunities for OAMP implementation (80, 23). ConclusionsThese topics will set the JEI's research and collaboration agenda for the next 5 years and stimulate ideas for others working in the field.
MULTIFILE
Background: Knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) among older adults account for substantial disability and extensive healthcare use. Effective pain coping strategies help to deal with OA. This study aims to determine the long-term relationship between pain coping style and the course of healthcare use in patients with knee and/or hip OA over 10 years. Methods: Baseline and 10-year follow-up data of 861 Dutch participants with early knee and/or hip OA from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) cohort were used. The amount of healthcare use (HCU) and pain coping style were measured. Generalized Estimating Equations were used, adjusted for relevant confounders. Results: At baseline, 86.5% of the patients had an active pain coping style. Having an active pain coping style was significantly (p = 0.022) associated with an increase of 16.5% (95% CI, 2.0–32.7) in the number of used healthcare services over 10 years. Conclusion: Patients with early knee and/or hip OA with an active pain coping style use significantly more different healthcare services over 10 years, as opposed to those with a passive pain coping style. Further research should focus on altered treatment (e.g., focus on self-management) in patients with an active coping style, to reduce HCU.
DOCUMENT
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.
DOCUMENT
ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of the “Plants for Joints” multidisciplinary lifestyle program in patients with metabolic syndrome-associated osteoarthritis (MSOA).DesignPatients with hip or knee MSOA were randomized to the intervention or control group. The intervention group followed a 16-week program in addition to usual care based on a whole food plant-based diet, physical activity, and stress management. The control group received usual care. The patient-reported Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total score (range 0–96) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included other patient-reported, anthropometric, and metabolic measures. An intention-to-treat analysis with a linear-mixed model adjusted for baseline values was used to analyze between-group differences.ResultsOf the 66 people randomized, 64 completed the study. Participants (84% female) had a mean (SD) age of 63 (6) years and body mass index of 33 (5) kg/m2. After 16 weeks, the intervention group (n = 32) had a mean 11-point larger improvement in WOMAC-score (95% CI 6–16; p = 0.0001) compared to the control group. The intervention group also lost more weight (–5 kg), fat mass (–4 kg), and waist circumference (–6 cm) compared to the control group. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) fatigue, pain interference, C-reactive protein, hemoglobin A1c, fasting glucose, and low-density lipoproteins improved in the intervention versus the control group, while other PROMIS measures, blood pressure, high-density lipoproteins, and triglycerides did not differ significantly between the groups.ConclusionThe “Plants for Joints” lifestyle program reduced stiffness, relieved pain, and improved physical function in people with hip or knee MSOA compared to usual care.
MULTIFILE
