Effectiveness of Stepped-Care Intervention in Overweight and Obese Patients With Medial Tibiofemoral Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major public health issue causing chronic pain, impaired physical function, and reduced quality of life. As there is no cure, self-management of symptoms via exercise is recommended by all current international clinical guidelines. This review updates one published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effects of land-based exercise for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) by comparing: 1) exercise versus attention control or placebo; 2) exercise versus no treatment, usual care, or limited education; 3) exercise added to another co-intervention versus the co-intervention alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), together with reference lists, from the date of the last search (1st May 2013) until 4 January 2024, unrestricted by language.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated exercise for knee OA versus a comparator listed above. Our outcomes of interest were pain severity, physical function, quality of life, participant-reported treatment success, adverse events, and study withdrawals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for systematic reviews of interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 139 trials (12,468 participants): 30 (3065 participants) compared exercise to attention control or placebo; 60 (4834 participants) compared exercise with usual care, no intervention or limited education; and 49 (4569 participants) evaluated exercise added to another intervention (e.g. weight loss diet, physical therapy, detailed education) versus that intervention alone. Interventions varied substantially in duration, ranging from 2 to 104 weeks. Most of the trials were at unclear or high risk of bias, in particular, performance bias (94% of trials), detection bias (94%), selective reporting bias (68%), selection bias (57%), and attrition bias (48%). Exercise versus attention control/placebo Compared with attention control/placebo, low-certainty evidence indicates exercise may result in a slight improvement in pain immediately post-intervention (mean 8.70 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.70 to 11.70; 28 studies, 2873 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence indicates exercise likely results in an improvement in physical function (mean 11.27 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 7.64 to 15.09; 24 studies, 2536 participants), but little to no improvement in quality of life (mean 6.06 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI -0.13 to 12.26; 6 studies, 454 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence that exercise likely increases participant-reported treatment success (risk ratio (RR) 1.46, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.92; 2 studies 364 participants), and likely does not increase study withdrawals (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.26; 29 studies, 2907 participants). There was low-certainty evidence that exercise may not increase adverse events (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.62 to 6.58; 11 studies, 1684 participants). Exercise versus no treatment/usual care/limited education Compared with no treatment/usual care/limited education, low-certainty evidence indicates exercise may result in an improvement in pain immediately post-intervention (mean 13.14 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 10.36 to 15.91; 56 studies, 4184 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence indicates exercise likely results in an improvement in physical function (mean 12.53 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 9.74 to 15.31; 54 studies, 4352 participants) and a slight improvement in quality of life (mean 5.37 points better (on a scale of to 100), 95% CI 3.19 to 7.54; 28 studies, 2328 participants). There was low-certainty evidence that exercise may result in no difference in participant-reported treatment success (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.49; 3 studies, 405 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence that exercise likely results in no difference in study withdrawals (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.20; 53 studies, 4408 participants). There was low-certainty evidence that exercise may increase adverse events (RR 3.17, 95% CI 1.17 to 8.57; 18 studies, 1557 participants). Exercise added to another co-intervention versus the co-intervention alone Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that exercise when added to a co-intervention likely results in improvements in pain immediately post-intervention compared to the co-intervention alone (mean 10.43 points better (on a scale of 0 to 100), 95% CI 8.06 to 12.79; 47 studies, 4441 participants). It also likely results in a slight improvement in physical function (mean 9.66 points better, 95% CI 7.48 to 11.97 (on a 0 to 100 scale); 44 studies, 4381 participants) and quality of life (mean 4.22 points better (on a 0 to 100 scale), 95% CI 1.36 to 7.07; 12 studies, 1660 participants) immediately post-intervention. There was moderate-certainty evidence that exercise likely increases participant-reported treatment success (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.24; 6 studies, 1139 participants), slightly reduces study withdrawals (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.97; 41 studies, 3502 participants), and slightly increases adverse events (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.76; 19 studies, 2187 participants). Subgroup analysis and meta-regression We did not find any differences in effects between different types of exercise, and we found no relationship between changes in pain or physical function and the total number of exercise sessions prescribed or the ratio (between exercise group and comparator) of real-time consultations with a healthcare provider. Clinical significance of the findings To determine whether the results found would make a clinically meaningful difference to someone with knee OA, we compared our results to established 'minimal important difference' (MID) scores for pain (12 points on a 0 to 100 scale), physical function (13 points), and quality of life (15 points). We found that the confidence intervals of mean differences either did not reach these thresholds or included both a clinically important and clinically unimportant improvement.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low- to moderate-certainty evidence that exercise probably results in an improvement in pain, physical function, and quality of life in the short-term. However, based on the thresholds for minimal important differences that we used, these benefits were of uncertain clinical importance. Participants in most trials were not blinded and were therefore aware of their treatment, and this may have contributed to reported improvements.

Knee braces for knee osteoarthritis: A scoping review and narrative synthesis of interventions in randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To identify and synthesise the content of knee bracing interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

In this scoping review, three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane) were searched up to 10th June 2024. Nineteen previous systematic reviews of knee bracing for knee OA and four recent international clinical practice guidelines were also hand searched. Identified studies were screened for eligibility by two independent reviewers. Information on bracing interventions was extracted from included RCT reports, informed by Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) guidelines. Data were synthesised narratively.

RESULTS

Thirty-one RCTs testing 47 different bracing interventions were included. Braces were broadly grouped as valgus/varus, patellofemoral, sleeve, neutral hinged, or control/placebo knee braces. Brace manufacturer and models varied, as did amount of recommended brace use. Only three interventions specifically targeted brace adherence. Information on brace providers, setting, number of treatment sessions, and intervention modification over time was poorly reported. Adherence to brace use was described for 32 (68%) interventions, most commonly via self-report. Several mechanisms of action for knee braces were proposed, broadly grouped as biomechanical, neuromuscular, and psychological.

CONCLUSIONS

Many different knee brace interventions have been tested for knee OA, with several proposed mechanisms of action, a lack of focus on adherence, and a lack of full reporting. These issues may be contributing to the heterogeneous findings and inconsistent guideline recommendations about the clinical effectiveness of knee bracing for knee OA to date.

Fundamentals of osteoarthritis. Rehabilitation: Exercise, diet, biomechanics, and physical therapist-delivered interventions

Insights related to the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis (OA) have informed rehabilitative treatments that aim to mitigate the influence of several known impairments and risk factors for OA, with the goal to improve pain, function, and quality of life. The purpose of this invited narrative review is to provide fundamental knowledge to non-specialists about exercise and education, diet, biomechanical interventions, and other physical therapist-delivered treatments. In addition to summarizing the rationale for common rehabilitative therapies, we provide a synthesis of current core recommendations. Robust evidence based on randomized clinical trials supports exercise with education and diet as core treatments for OA. Structured, supervised exercise therapy is advised. The mode of exercise may vary but should be individualized. The dose should be based on an initial assessment, the desired physiological changes, and progressed when appropriate. Diet combined with exercise is strongly recommended and studies demonstrate a dose-response relationship between the magnitude of weight loss and symptom improvement. Recent evidence suggests the use of technology to remotely deliver exercise, diet and education interventions is cost-effective. Although several studies support the mechanisms for biomechanical interventions (e.g., bracing, shoe inserts) and physical therapist-delivered (passive) treatments (e.g., manual therapy, electrotherapeutic modalities) fewer rigorous randomized trials support their clinical use; these therapies are sometimes recommended as adjuncts to core treatments. The mechanisms of action for all rehabilitative interventions include contextual factors such as attention and placebo effects. These effects can challenge our interpretation of treatment efficacy from clinical trials, yet also provide opportunities to maximize patient outcomes in clinical practice. When evaluating rehabilitative interventions, the field may benefit from increased emphasis on research that considers contextual factors while evaluating mechanistic, longer-term, clinically-important and policy-relevant outcome measures.

Baseline knee osteoarthritis radiographic severity as a predictor of symptom response to diet and exercise program: A secondary analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether baseline joint space narrowing (JSN) predicted disease remission, knee pain, and physical function changes in persons with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

This study is a secondary analysis of a two-armed randomized controlled trial. Participants were aged ≥50 years (n = 171) with a body mass index ≥28 kg/m2 and radiographic medial tibiofemoral OA. Participants in the intervention group received diet and exercise programs and special treatment (cognitive behavioral therapy, knee brace, and muscle strengthening exercises) according to the disease remission. Remission of pain and remission of patient global assessment of disease activity and/or functional impairment were used to define the disease remission. The control group were provided with an education pamphlet. The primary outcome was disease remission at 32 weeks, and the secondary outcomes were the changes in knee pain and physical function at 20 and 32 weeks. Baseline JSN was scored from 0 to 3, and the association between baseline JSN and outcomes was assessed using multiple regression.

RESULTS

There was no association of baseline JSN with disease remission at 32 weeks when the disease remission has been achieved. The baseline JSN grade 3 was associated with changes in knee pain at 20 weeks (p < .05). There was no association between baseline JSN and physical function.

CONCLUSION

Baseline JSN severity predicted changes in knee pain but not the disease remission or changes in physical functions. Identification of baseline radiographic severity may be helpful in identifying differences in response to diet and exercise programs in knee OA.

Healthcare utilization patterns for knee or hip osteoarthritis before and after changes in national health insurance coverage: A data linkage study

INTRODUCTION

Medical guidelines aim to stimulate stepped care for knee and hip osteoarthritis, redirecting treatments from hospitals to primary care. In the Netherlands, this development was supported by changing health insurance coverage for physio/exercise therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate healthcare utilization patterns before and after health changes in health insurance coverage.

METHOD

We analyzed electronic health records and claims data from patients with osteoarthritis in the knee (N = 32,091) and hip (N = 16,313). Changes between 2013 and 2019 in the proportion of patients treated by the general practitioner, physio/exercise therapist or orthopedic surgeon within 6 months after onset were assessed.

RESULTS

Joint replacement surgeries decreased for knee (OR 0.47 [0.41-0.54]) and hip (OR 0.81 [0.71-0.93]) osteoarthritis between 2013-2019. The use of physio/exercise therapy increased (knee: OR 1.38 [1.24-1.53], hip: OR 1.26 [1.08-1.47]). However, the proportion treated by a physio/exercise therapist decreased for patients that had not depleted their annual deductibles (knee: OR 0.86 [0.79 - 0.94], hip: OR 0.90 [0.79 - 1.02]). This might be affected by the inclusion of physio/exercise therapy in basic health insurance in 2018.

CONCLUSION

We have found a shift from hospitals to primary care in knee and hip osteoarthritis care. However, the use of physio/exercise therapy declined after changes in insurance coverage for patients that had not depleted their deductibles.

Researchers in rheumatology should avoid categorization of continuous predictor variables

BACKGROUND

Rheumatology researchers often categorize continuous predictor variables. We aimed to show how this practice may alter results from observational studies in rheumatology.

METHODS

We conducted and compared the results of two analyses of the association between our predictor variable (percentage change in body mass index [BMI] from baseline to four years) and two outcome variable domains of structure and pain in knee and hip osteoarthritis. These two outcome variable domains covered 26 different outcomes for knee and hip combined. In the first analysis (categorical analysis), percentage change in BMI was categorized as ≥ 5% decrease in BMI, < 5% change in BMI, and ≥ 5% increase in BMI, while in the second analysis (continuous analysis), it was left as a continuous variable. In both analyses (categorical and continuous), we used generalized estimating equations with a logistic link function to investigate the association between the percentage change in BMI and the outcomes.

RESULTS

For eight of the 26 investigated outcomes (31%), the results from the categorical analyses were different from the results from the continuous analyses. These differences were of three types: 1) for six of these eight outcomes, while the continuous analyses revealed associations in both directions (i.e., a decrease in BMI had one effect, while an increase in BMI had the opposite effect), the categorical analyses showed associations only in one direction of BMI change, not both; 2) for another one of these eight outcomes, the categorical analyses suggested an association with change in BMI, while this association was not shown in the continuous analyses (this is potentially a false positive association); 3) for the last of the eight outcomes, the continuous analyses suggested an association of change in BMI, while this association was not shown in the categorical analyses (this is potentially a false negative association).

CONCLUSIONS

Categorization of continuous predictor variables alters the results of analyses and could lead to different conclusions; therefore, researchers in rheumatology should avoid it.

Effect of a valgus brace on medial tibiofemoral joint contact force in knee osteoarthritis with varus malalignment: A within-participant cross-over randomised study with an uncontrolled observational longitudinal follow-up

Background

Previous investigations on valgus knee bracing have mostly used the external knee adduction moment. This is a critical limitation, as the external knee adduction moment does not account for muscle forces that contribute substantially to the medial tibiofemoral contact force (MTCF) during walking. The aims of this pilot study were to: 1) determine the effect of a valgus knee brace on MTCF; 2) determine whether the effect is more pronounced after 8 weeks of brace use; 3) assess the feasibility of an 8-week brace intervention.

Methods

Participants with medial radiographic knee OA and varus malalignment were fitted with an Össur Unloader One^© brace. Participants were instructed to wear the brace for 8 weeks. The MTCF was estimated via an electromyogram-assisted neuromuscular model with and without the knee brace at week 0 and week 8. Feasibility outcomes included change in symptoms, quality of life, confidence, acceptability, adherence and adverse events.

Results

Of the 30 (60% male) participants enrolled, 28 (93%) completed 8-week outcome assessments. There was a main effect of the brace (p<0.001) on peak MTCF and MTCF impulse, but no main effect for time (week 0 and week 8, p = 0.10), and no interaction between brace and time (p = 0.62). Wearing the brace during walking significantly reduced the peak MTCF (-0.05 BW 95%CI [-0.10, -0.01]) and MTCF impulse (-0.07 BW.s 95%CI [-0.09, -0.05]). Symptoms and quality of life improved by clinically relevant magnitudes over the 8-week intervention. Items relating to confidence and acceptability were rated relatively highly. Participants wore the brace on average 6 hrs per day. Seventeen participants reported 30 minor adverse events over an 8-week period.

Conclusion

Although significant, reductions in the peak MTCF and MTCF while wearing the knee brace were small. No effect of time on MTCF was observed. Although there were numerous minor adverse events, feasibility outcomes were generally favourable.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (12619000622101).

Relative Efficacy of Weight Management, Exercise, and Combined Treatment for Muscle Mass and Physical Sarcopenia Indices in Adults with Overweight or Obesity and Osteoarthritis: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Aging and osteoarthritis are associated with high risk of muscle mass loss, which leads to physical disability; this loss can be effectively alleviated by diet (DI) and exercise (ET) interventions. This study investigated the relative effects of different types of diet, exercise, and combined treatment (DI+ET) on muscle mass and functional outcomes in individuals with obesity and lower-limb osteoarthritis. A comprehensive search of online databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy of DI, ET, and DI+ET in patients with obesity and lower-extremity osteoarthritis. The included RCTs were analyzed through network meta-analysis and risk-of-bias assessment. We finally included 34 RCTs with a median (range/total) Physiotherapy Evidence Database score of 6.5 (4-8/10). DI plus resistance ET, resistance ET alone, and aerobic ET alone were ranked as the most effective treatments for increasing muscle mass (standard mean difference (SMD) = 1.40), muscle strength (SMD = 1.93), and walking speed (SMD = 0.46). Our findings suggest that DI+ET is beneficial overall for muscle mass in overweight or obese adults with lower-limb osteoarthritis, especially those who are undergoing weight management.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2020: rehabilitation and outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Systematically review and synthesize guidelines, systematic reviews, or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between April 1, 2019 and April 30, 2020 which evaluated or made recommendations for rehabilitation of persons with osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

Five electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINHAL, Web of Science) were searched with a comprehensive search strategy. Guidelines for rehabilitation of persons with osteoarthritis, and systematic reviews and RCTs evaluating osteoarthritis rehabilitation that included at least one patient-reported outcome measure and/or clinical test of function were included. Two authors independently screened records and assessed methodological quality using the AGREE-II (guidelines), AMSTAR-2 (systematic reviews) or PEDro scale (RCTs). Data were extracted to summarize included records and a narrative synthesis of findings related to core recommended osteoarthritis rehabilitation treatments performed.

RESULTS

Of 2,479 potential records, 253 records were reviewed. Two guidelines, 18 systematic reviews and 38 RCTs were included. 84% (n = 49) of included records related to knee osteoarthritis, 13% (n = 8) to hip, 10% (n = 6) to hand, 3% (n = 2) to mixed, and 1% (n = 1) to foot osteoarthritis. Exercise-therapy, methods to deliver exercise-therapy remotely, and approaches to facilitate exercise-therapy behaviour change were the most commonly evaluated interventions (n = 27). 94% of systematic reviews and 63% of RCTs rated high-quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoarthritis rehabilitation research continues to focus on knee osteoarthritis and exercise-based interventions. Emerging topics include rehabilitation of comorbid populations, exercise behaviour change and technology supports. A better understanding of rehabilitation of osteoarthritis in joints other than the knee, and methods to determine and promote ideal exercise-therapy prescription are needed.

Exploring Attitudes and Experiences of People With Knee Osteoarthritis Toward a Self-Directed eHealth Intervention to Support Exercise: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent and debilitating condition. Exercise is a recommended treatment because of its effectiveness at improving pain and function. However, exercise is underutilized in OA management. Difficulty accessing health care has been identified as a key barrier to exercise uptake. Innovative and scalable methods of delivering exercise treatments to people with knee OA are needed. We developed a self-directed eHealth intervention to enable and encourage exercise participation. The effectiveness of this intervention on pain and function in people with knee OA is being evaluated in a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the attitudes and experiences of people with knee OA who accessed the self-directed eHealth intervention and the features perceived as useful to facilitate self-directed exercise.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study embedded within a randomized controlled trial. Individual, semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 16 people with knee OA who had accessed a 24-week eHealth intervention (website and behavior change SMS program) designed to support exercise participation. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed using an inductive approach.

RESULTS

Five themes arose: (1) technology easy to use and follow (website ease of use, SMS ease of use), (2) facilitators to exercise participation (credible OA and exercise information, website features, prescribed exercises simple to do unsupervised, freedom to adapt the exercise to suit needs, influence of other health care experiences), (3) sense of support and accountability (SMS good reminder and prompt, accountable, SMS tone and automation could trigger negative emotions [eg, guilt or shame], inability to contact someone when needed), (4) positive outcomes (knee symptom improvements, confidence to self-manage, encouraged active living), (5) suggestions for real-world application (provided by a health professional preferred, should be provided at subsidized or low out-of-pocket cost).

CONCLUSIONS

People with knee OA had mostly positive experiences with and attitudes towards the use of an eHealth intervention that supported exercise participation independent of a health professional. A human connection associated with the eHealth intervention appeared important.