Relationship Between Strength Parameters and Functional Performance Tests in Patients With Severe Knee Osteoarthritis

Do people with musculoskeletal pain differ from healthy cohorts in terms of global measures of strength? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

It is currently unknown if people with musculoskeletal pain display different multi-joint strength capacities than healthy cohorts. The aim was to investigate whether people with musculoskeletal pain show differences in global measures of strength in comparison to healthy cohorts.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted using three databases (Medline, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

REVIEW METHODS

Studies involving participants with painful musculoskeletal conditions and multi-joint strength assessment measured at baseline were included. A meta-analysis was also performed to compute standardized mean differences (± 95% confidence intervals), using Hedge's g, and examined the differences in multi-joint strength at baseline between participants with painful musculoskeletal conditions and healthy participants.

RESULTS

In total, 5043 articles were identified, of which 20 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative analysis. The available evidence revealed that multi-joint strength values were limited to knee osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, chronic low back pain, and rheumatoid arthritis. Only four studies were included in the quantitative synthesis and revealed that only small differences in both chest press (g = -0.34, 95% CI [-0.64, -0.03]) and leg press (g = -0.25, 95% CI [-0.49, -0.02]) existed between adult women with fibromyalgia and active community women.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of multi-joint strength values in participants with musculoskeletal pain. Quantitative comparison with healthy cohorts was limited, except for those with fibromyalgia. Adult women with fibromyalgia displayed reduced multi-joint strength values in comparison to active community women.

Linear Motor Driven Leg-Press Dynamometer for Testing, Training, and Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review with a Focus on the Concept of Serial Stretch Loading

Background: The purpose of this scoping review was to analyze the evidence of acute and long-term effects of the application of leg-press strength training with or without serial stretch-loading stimuli on various biomechanical and physiological outcomes. Methods: This review was performed in accordance with PRISMA for Scoping Reviews recommendations, and two researchers independently searched the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. All studies that used unique leg-press device for testing, acute responses and long-term adaptation were included in this review, irrespective of the measured outcomes. A total of 13 studies were included in this review, with 5 focused on the testing capabilities of the device and acute training responses and 8 focused on the long-term adaptations in various physical and physiological outcomes. Results: Regarding the acute responses after leg-press strength training with or without serial stretch-loading stimuli, visible changes were observed in the muscle force, rate of force development, and hormonal concentrations between pre- and postmenopausal women (only one study). Long-term studies revealed different training adaptations after performing leg-press strength training with unique serial stretch-loading stimuli. A positive trend for leg-press strength training with serial stretch-loading was recorded in the young population and athletes; however, more variable training effects favoring one or the other approach were achieved in the older population. Conclusions: In summary, this review shows the uniqueness and usability of a leg-press device that is capable of various exercising modes, including special serial stretch-loading stimuli. The use of this device can serve as a positive addition to training regiments, and the main application appears to be suitable for rehabilitation needs.

Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Step Up and Down (StUD) test for individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Stair climbing test (SCT) has been suggested as the first task affected in individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, there are environmental barriers for the execution of the 9- to 12-step SCT. Thus, we developed a feasible one-step SCT that could be completed in 15s.

OBJECTIVE

To check the clinimetric properties of the 15s Step Up and Down (StUD) test in individuals with KOA.

DESIGN

Prospective validity study.

METHOD

Eighty-two individuals with KOA participated in this study. The test-retest reliability of the StUD test was measured with a 1-week interval. The construct validity and responsiveness were assessed by testing predefined hypotheses. For this, the 30s Chair Stand Test (30CS), Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), quadriceps strength, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Lequesne Algofunctional Index were used as comparator instruments.

RESULTS

The StUD test presented good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.79-0.91) and showed a moderate to good correlation with the 30CS (r = 0.65), TUG (r = -0.56), and quadriceps strength (r = 0.41). We found a higher correlation between the StUD test and the performance-based tests than the patient-reported outcome measures. The StUD test was responsive, with five out of the six (83.3%) hypotheses confirmed.

CONCLUSION

StUD test showed good reliability, adequate validity and responsiveness. Our findings suggest that StUD is a useful performance-based test for individuals with KOA.

Effects of high-load and low-load resistance training in patients with coronary artery disease: rationale and design of a randomised controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Resistance training (RT) combined with aerobic training (AT) enhances the effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). However, it remains to be investigated which type of RT (high loads (HLs) vs low loads (LLs)) is more efficacious in improving exercise performance, cardio-metabolic health and quality of life.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A randomised, controlled, clinical trial will enrol 20 patients with CAD into each of three study arms (total 60 patients): HL-RT (70%-80% of one repetition maximum (1-RM)) combined with AT; LL-RT (30%-40% of 1-RM) combined with AT and AT alone as standard care. Primary outcomes (maximal aerobic capacity, maximal leg isometric strength) will be assessed at baseline and after 36 training sessions. Other outcomes will include acute haemodynamic responses to LL-RT and HL-RT, body composition, physical performance, blood biomarkers (lipids, glucose metabolism, inflammation, growth factors), physical activity and quality of life. The intention-to-treat principle will be used to analyse the data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study design and protocol have been approved by the National Medical Ethics Committee of Slovenia (registration number: 0120-573/2019/15). The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The results of the study will be published as peer-reviewed manuscripts and congress presentations, communicated with patients and the clinical community, and shared through posts on social media. The findings of the study will be disseminated among the national CR clinical community (CR centres, Slovenian association of coronary clubs) with active participation of the patients enrolled in the study. This study will expand our knowledge of RT in combination with AT in CR. We expect to find different effects of HL-RT versus LL-RT, with implications for RT strategies in rehabilitation of patients with CAD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04638764.

Treatment of Osteoarthritis Secondary to Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip with Prolotherapy Injection versus a Supervised Progressive Exercise Control

BACKGROUND Osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is one of the major causes of hip pain and disability. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of prolotherapy (PrT) injections versus exercise protocol for the treatment of DDH. MATERIAL AND METHODS There were 46 hips of 41 patients who had osteoarthritis secondary to DDH included in this study. Patients were divided into 2 groups: treated with PrT (PrT group; n=20) and exercise (control group; n=21). Clinical outcomes were evaluated with visual analog scale for pain (VAS) and Harris hip score (HHS) at baseline, 3 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and a minimum of 1-year follow-up. In PrT group clinical results were also compared in Crowe type I-IV hips. RESULTS Between group analysis revealed no significant between group differences at baseline. Dextrose injection recipients out performed exercise controls for VAS pain change score at 6 months (-4.6±2.6 versus -2.8±2.5; P=0.016), and 12 months (-4.5±2.4 versus -2.9±2.5; P=0.017) and for HHS at 6 months (24.2±14.0 versus 14.8±12.4; P=0.007) and 12 months (24.3±13.4 versus 16.5±11.3; P=0.018). CONCLUSIONS To our best knowledge, this study is the first regarding the effects of an injection method in the treatment of osteoarthritis secondary to DDH. According to our study, PrT is superior to exercises. PrT could provide significant improvement for clinical outcomes in DDH and might delay surgery.