A pragmatic randomized controlled study of the effectiveness and cost consequences of exercise therapy in hip osteoarthritis

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatments for Musculoskeletal Conditions Offered by Physiotherapists: A Systematic Review of Trial-Based Evaluations

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal conditions are a leading contributor to disability worldwide. The treatment of these conditions accounts for 7% of health care costs in Germany and is often provided by physiotherapists. Yet, an overview of the cost-effectiveness of treatments for musculoskeletal conditions offered by physiotherapists is missing. This review aims to provide an overview of full economic evaluations of interventions for musculoskeletal conditions offered by physiotherapists.

METHODS

We systematically searched for publications in Medline, EconLit, and NHS-EED. Title and abstracts, followed by full texts were screened independently by two authors. We included trial-based full economic evaluations of physiotherapeutic interventions for patients with musculoskeletal conditions and allowed any control group. We extracted participants' information, the setting, the intervention, and details on the economic analyses. We evaluated the quality of the included articles with the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist.

RESULTS

We identified 5141 eligible publications and included 83 articles. The articles were based on 78 clinical trials. They addressed conditions of the spine (n = 39), the upper limb (n = 8), the lower limb (n = 30), and some other conditions (n = 6). The most investigated conditions were low back pain (n = 25) and knee and hip osteoarthritis (n = 16). The articles involved 69 comparisons between physiotherapeutic interventions (in which we defined primary interventions) and 81 comparisons in which only one intervention was offered by a physiotherapist. Physiotherapeutic interventions compared to those provided by other health professionals were cheaper and more effective in 43% (18/42) of the comparisons. Ten percent (4/42) of the interventions were dominated. The overall quality of the articles was high. However, the description of delivered interventions varied widely and often lacked details. This limited fair treatment comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence was found for physiotherapeutic interventions to be cost-effective, but the result depends on the patient group, intervention, and control arm. Treatments of knee and back conditions were primarily investigated, highlighting a need for physiotherapeutic cost-effectiveness analyses of less often investigated joints and conditions. The documentation of provided interventions needs improvement to enable clinicians and stakeholders to fairly compare interventions and ultimately adopt cost-effective treatments.

Joint instability in patients with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip

BACKGROUND

The treatment strategy for developmental dysplasia of the hip is determined based on the lateral center-edge angle. Nonetheless, an evaluation of joint instability may be important in determining the treatment strategy. This study classified the displacement patterns of the femoral head center during hip abduction.

METHODS

Ten patients with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip, 10 patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip, and 10 patients with normal hips were analyzed. Image matching was performed using X-ray images of hip abduction with a three-dimensional hip model. The displacement of the femoral head center and its trajectory length were measured. A cluster analysis was conducted to classify the displacement pattern of the femoral head center, and trajectory lengths were compared.

FINDINGS

Displacement was classified into three patterns: medialization, hinge abduction, and centering. Patients with borderline developmental hip dysplasia exhibited all three patterns. Almost all patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip showed medialization and hinge abduction, whereas all normal patients had the centering type. The mean trajectory length indices for the medialization and hinge abduction types were significantly longer than those for the centering type (P = 0.01 and P = 0.016, respectively).

INTERPRETATION

Borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip is a heterogeneous condition characterized by varying hip instability levels. Our findings suggest that uniform evaluation based on the lateral center-edge angle is inappropriate and that joint instability must be evaluated in each patient with borderline developmental dysplasia of the hip.

Primary care-based models of care for osteoarthritis; a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To identify and describe the extent, nature, characteristics, and impact of primary care-based models of care (MoCs) for osteoarthritis (OA) that have been developed and/or evaluated.

DESIGN

Six electronic databases were searched from 2010 to May 2022. Relevant data were extracted and collated for narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Sixty-three studies pertaining to 37 discrete MoCs from 13 countries were included, of which 23 (62%) could be classified as OA management programmes (OAMPs) comprising a self-management intervention to be delivered as a discrete package. Four models (11%) focussed on enhancing the initial consultation between a patient presenting with OA at the first point of contact into a local health system and the clinician. Emphasis was placed on educational training for general practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals delivering this initial consultation. The remaining 10 MoCs (27%) detailed integrated care pathways of onward referral to specialist secondary orthopaedic and rheumatology care within local healthcare systems. The majority (35/37; 95%) were developed in high-income countries and 32/37 (87%) targeted hip/and or knee OA. Frequently identified model components included GP-led care, referral to primary care services and multidisciplinary care. The models were predominantly 'one-size fits all' and lacked individualised care approaches. A minority of MoCs, 5/37 (14%) were developed using underlying frameworks, three (8%) of which incorporated behaviour change theories, while 13/37 (35%) incorporated provider training. Thirty-four of the 37 models (92%) were evaluated. Outcome domains most frequently reported included clinical outcomes, followed by system- and provider-level outcomes. While there was evidence of improved quality of OA care associated with the models, effects on clinical outcomes were mixed.

CONCLUSION

There are emerging efforts internationally to develop evidence-based models focused on non-surgical primary care OA management. Notwithstanding variations in healthcare systems and resources, future research should focus on model development alignment with implementation science frameworks and theories, key stakeholder involvement including patient and public representation, provision of training and education for providers, treatment individualisation, integration and coordination of services across the care continuum and incorporation of behaviour change strategies to foster long-term adherence and self-management.

Effect of exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis

Objective

To evaluate the existing evidence on the effect of exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA) compared to no treatment and explore whether a further trial will change the current evidence.

Design

Systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis using randomized controlled trials (RCT) to determine the effect on pain and function post-treatment, and at 6-9 months after treatment. Standardized mean difference (SMD) ​≤ ​-0.37 was considered clinically worthwhile. Extended funnel plots were used to simulate the impact of a new trial on the pooled effect size of pain and function.

Results

18 RCTs were included. Post-treatment we found a beneficial effect of exercise therapy on pain (SMD -0.38, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.55 to -0.22) and function (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.11). A beneficial effect of exercise therapy on pain (SMD -0.23, 95% CI: 0.41 to -0.05) and function (SMD -0.29, 95% CI: 0.45 to -0.12) was found 6-9 months after treatment. Most effect estimates were small, and it is unclear whether these are clinically meaningful. Extended funnel plots and a simulation of a new trial showed that only a new trial with a larger effect than the current pooled effect or a trial including 74,843 participants would change the pooled effect estimate from an unclear to a clearly clinically worthwhile effect.

Conclusions

We found a beneficial effect of exercise therapy on pain and function in hip OA. It is unlikely a new trial added to current evidence will change the conclusion.

Progressive resistance training compared to neuromuscular exercise in patients with hip osteoarthritis and the additive effect of exercise booster sessions: protocol for a multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial (The Hip Booster Trial)

INTRODUCTION

The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial is to investigate the effectiveness of 3 months of progressive resistance training (PRT) compared to neuromuscular exercise (NEMEX) on functional performance in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). Secondary aims are to investigate the effectiveness of exercise booster sessions (EBS) in prolonging the effects of the initial exercise interventions as well as to investigate the cost-effectiveness of PRT, NEMEX and EBS at 12-month follow-up.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted at hospitals and physiotherapy clinics across Denmark. A total of 160 participants with clinically diagnosed hip OA will be recruited. Participants will be cluster randomised to a 3-month intervention of either PRT or NEMEX and to receive EBS or not, resulting in four treatment arms.The primary outcome is change in functional performance, measured by the 30 s chair stand test at 3 months for the primary comparison and at 12 months for the EBS comparisons. Secondary outcomes include changes in 40 m fast-paced walk test, 9-step timed stair climb test, leg extensor muscle power and maximal strength, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, EuroQol Group 5-dimension, global perceived effect, physical activity and pain. Outcomes are measured at baseline, after the initial 3 months of intervention, and at 6-month, 9-month and 12-month follow-up. An intention-to-treat approach will be used for analysing changes in the primary and secondary outcome measures.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial has been approved by the Central Denmark Region Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics (Journal No 1-10-72-267-20) and registered at the Danish Data Protection Agency (Journal No 1-16-02-11-21). Results will be published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04714047.

Secondary Analysis of a Study on Exercise Therapy in Hip Osteoarthritis: Follow-Up Data on Pain and Physical Functioning

We evaluated the short- and longer-term effects of exercise therapy in hip osteoarthritis patients (OA) at baseline, three, six, and 12 months in a randomized setting, followed by a non-randomized setting. The primary randomized intervention (E = exercise, P = placebo–ultrasound, C = control) was followed by a voluntary three-month exercise therapy for P and C (renamed P-E, C-E). Participants randomized to E were not offered treatment again (E-C). Effect sizes (ES; 95% CI) were calculated for within-group effects across time for bodily pain (SF-36) and WOMAC pain, function, and stiffness. ANCOVAs of post-treatment scores were used for group comparison after the group-specific exercise intervention phase. Exercise adherence was assessed and related to post-treatment scores of clinical outcomes. Data of 115 participants of the RCT eligible for follow-up and completing exercise therapy were included into our analyses. Small to medium beneficial long-term effects of cumulative interventional effects, including exercise training, persisted in all groups. Group E-C (n = 49) showed significant 12 months vs. baseline within-group ES in all outcomes (ES 0.39–0.59) except stiffness. Findings were less prominent for exercise therapy in a non-randomized setting (C-E, P-E, both n = 33). Differences are partially explained by adherence rates, highlighting the relevance of therapy compliance strategies. Short-term between-group differences (ANCOVAs) only showed statistically significant differences for WOMAC function between P-E and E-C in favor of E-C (6.4 (95% CI 1.6–11.2; score range 0–100)).

Health Economic Evaluations of Hip and Knee Interventions in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

BACKGROUND

The economic burden of musculoskeletal diseases is substantial and growing. Economic evaluations compare costs and health benefits of interventions simultaneously to help inform value-based care; thus, it is crucial to ensure that studies are using appropriate methodology to provide valid evidence on the cost-effectiveness of interventions. This is particularly the case in orthopaedic sports medicine, where several interventions of varying costs are available to treat common hip and knee conditions.

PURPOSE

To summarize and evaluate the quality of economic evaluations in orthopaedic sports medicine for knee and hip interventions and identify areas for quality improvement.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

The Medline, AMED, OVID Health Star, and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2020, to identify economic evaluations that compared ≥2 interventions for hip and/or knee conditions in orthopaedic sports medicine. We assessed the quality of full economic evaluations using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool, which consists of 16 questions for a total score of 100. We classified studies into quartiles based on QHES score (extremely poor quality to high quality) and we evaluated the frequency of studies that addressed each of the 16 QHES questions.

RESULTS

A total of 93 studies were included in the systematic review. There were 41 (44%) cost analyses, of which 21 (51%) inappropriately concluded interventions were cost-effective. Only 52 (56%) of the included studies were full economic evaluations, although 40 of these (77%) fell in the high-quality quartile. The mean QHES score was 83.2 ± 19. Authors consistently addressed 12 of the QHES questions; questions that were missed or unclear were related to statistical uncertainty, appropriateness of costing methodology, and discussion of potential biases. The most frequently missed question was whether the cost perspective of the analysis was stated and justified.

CONCLUSION

The number of studies in orthopaedic sports medicine is small, despite their overall good quality. Yet, there are still many highly cited studies based on low-quality or partial economic evaluations that are being used to influence clinical decision-making. Investigators should follow international health economic guidelines for study design and critical appraisal of studies to further improve quality.

Responders to Exercise Therapy in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Hip: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology workgroup (OMERACT), together with the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) developed the OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria. These criteria are used to determine if a patient with osteoarthritis (OA) ‘responds’ to therapy, meaning experiences a clinically relevant effect of therapy. Recently, more clinical OA trials report on this outcome and most OA trials have data to calculate the number of responders according to these criteria. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed on the response to exercise therapy, compared to no or minimal intervention in patients with hip OA using the OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria. The literature was searched for relevant randomized trials. If a trial fit the inclusion criteria, but number of responders was not reported, the first author was contacted. This way the numbers of responders of 14 trials were collected and a meta-analysis on short term (directly after treatment, 12 trials n = 1178) and long term (6–8 months after treatment, six trials n = 519) outcomes was performed. At short term, the risk difference (RD) was 0.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06–0.22) and number needed to treat (NNT) 7.1 (95% CI 4.5–17); at long term RD was 0.14 (95% CI 0.07–0.20) and NNT 7.1 (95% CI 5.0–14.3). Quality of evidence was moderate for the short term and high for the long term. In conclusion, 14% more hip OA patients responded to exercise therapy than to no therapy.

Relative Efficacy of Different Exercises for Pain, Function, Performance and Quality of Life in Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Guidelines recommend exercise as a core treatment for osteoarthritis (OA). However, it is unclear which type of exercise is most effective, leading to inconsistency between different recommendations.

Objectives

The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to investigate the relative efficacy of different exercises (aerobic, mind–body, strengthening, flexibility/skill, or mixed) for improving pain, function, performance and quality of life (QoL) for knee and hip OA at, or nearest to, 8 weeks.

Methods

We searched nine electronic databases up until December 2017 for randomised controlled trials that compared exercise with usual care or with another exercise type. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to estimate the relative effect size (ES) and corresponding 95% credibility interval (CrI) (PROSPERO registration: CRD42016033865).

Findings

We identified and analysed 103 trials (9134 participants). Aerobic exercise was most beneficial for pain (ES 1.11; 95% CrI 0.69, 1.54) and performance (1.05; 0.63, 1.48). Mind–body exercise, which had pain benefit equivalent to that of aerobic exercise (1.11; 0.63, 1.59), was the best for function (0.81; 0.27, 1.36). Strengthening and flexibility/skill exercises improved multiple outcomes at a moderate level. Mixed exercise was the least effective for all outcomes and had significantly less pain relief than aerobic and mind–body exercises. The trend was significant for pain (p = 0.01), but not for function (p = 0.07), performance (p = 0.06) or QoL (p = 0.65).

Conclusion

The effect of exercise varies according to the type of exercise and target outcome. Aerobic or mind–body exercise may be the best for pain and function improvements. Strengthening and flexibility/skill exercises may be used for multiple outcomes. Mixed exercise is the least effective and the reason for this merits further investigation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40279-019-01082-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial for Aerobic and Strengthening Exercises on Physical Function and Pain for Hip Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Hip osteoarthritis (OA) limits lower extremity physical function. Exercise therapy may improve physical function and reduce pain in patients with hip OA.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to measure the effect of a structured hip-specific resistance and aerobic exercise program on physical function and self-reported pain in adults with hip OA.

DESIGN

Pilot RCT.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty one adults with radiographic hip OA.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to a 3-month structured exercise intervention (n = 21) or a 3-month waitlist control (n = 10).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The 6-minute walk test was the primary outcome measure. Self-reported physical function was assessed with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical function subscale and pain visual analog scale (VAS). Measures of feasibility were assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

From baseline to 3 months, the median change from baseline in distance covered during the 6-minute walk test in the intervention group (49 m) was double that of the control group (22 m), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .13). Likewise, the WOMAC physical function subscale score median changes in the intervention group (5 points) were double that of the controls (2 points), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = .06). Median change in pain scores was slightly reduced in each group but not significantly different between groups (P = .53).

CONCLUSION

Although no statistically significant between-group differences were found in this pilot RCT, improvements were seen in measures of physical function compared to controls. A larger RCT of this structured exercise program may be warranted.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of conservative treatments for chronic lower extremity musculoskeletal complaints

Objective

The aim was to appraise and synthesize studies evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of conservative interventions for chronic lower extremity musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions and describe their characteristics, including the type of economic evaluation, primary outcomes and which conditions.

Methods

The search strategy related to economic evaluations of lower limb MSK conditions that used conservative therapies. Eight electronic databases were searched (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, NHSEED and Proquest), as were the reference lists from included articles. The quality of articles was appraised using a modified version of the economic evaluations’ reporting checklist (economic) and The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias (clinical).

Results

Twenty-six studies were eligible and included in the review. Economic evaluations of conservative interventions for OA or pain affecting the knee/hip (n = 25; 93%) were most common. The main approaches adopted were cost–utility analysis (n = 17; 68%) or cost–effectiveness analysis (n = 5; 19%). Two studies involved interventions including footwear/foot orthoses; for heel pain (n = 1; 4%) and overuse injuries (n = 1; 4%). Fifty per cent of economic evaluations adopted the EQ-5D-3L as the primary outcome measure for quality of life and quality-adjusted life year calculations.

Conclusion

Economic evaluations have been conducted largely for exercise-based interventions for MSK conditions of the hip and knee. Few economic evaluations have been conducted for other clinically important lower limb MSK conditions. A matrix presentation of costs mapped with outcomes indicated increasing costs with either no difference or improvements in clinical effectiveness. The majority of economic evaluations were of good reporting quality, as were the accompanying clinical studies.

Exercise-induced hypoalgesia: A meta-analysis of exercise dosing for the treatment of chronic pain

OBJECTIVE

Increasing evidence purports exercise as a first-line therapeutic for the treatment of nearly all forms of chronic pain. However, knowledge of efficacious dosing respective to treatment modality and pain condition is virtually absent in the literature. The purpose of this analysis was to calculate the extent to which exercise treatment shows dose-dependent effects similar to what is seen with pharmacological treatments.

METHODS

A recently published comprehensive review of exercise and physical activity for chronic pain in adults was identified in May 2017. This report reviewed different physical activity and exercise interventions and their effectiveness in reducing pain severity and found overall modest effects of exercise in the treatment of pain. We analyzed this existing data set, focusing specifically on the dose of exercise intervention in these studies. We re-analyzed data from 75 studies looking at benefits of time of exercising per week, frequency of exercise per week, duration of intervention (in weeks), and estimated intensity of exercise.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed a significant positive correlation with exercise duration and analgesic effect on neck pain. Multiple linear regression modeling of these data predicted that increasing the frequency of exercise sessions per week is most likely to have a positive effect on chronic pain patients.

DISCUSSION

Modest effects were observed with one significant correlation between duration and pain effect for neck pain. Overall, these results provide insufficient evidence to conclude the presence of a strong dose effect of exercise in pain, but our modeling data provide tes predictions that can be used to design future studies to explicitly test the question of dose in specific patient populations.

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: the BEEP trial

Objectives

Evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of enhancing physical therapy exercise programmes in order to improve outcomes for patients with knee OA remains unclear. This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of two enhanced physical therapy interventions compared with usual physical therapy care (UC) for adults with knee OA.

Methods

A trial-based cost–utility analysis of individually tailored exercise (ITE) or targeted exercise adherence (TEA) compared with UC was undertaken over a period of 18 months. Patient-level costs were obtained, and effectiveness was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), allowing the calculation of cost per QALY gained from a base-case UK health-care perspective.

Results

The UC group was associated with lower National Health Service (NHS) costs [ITE-UC: £273.30, 95% CI: £−62.10 to £562.60; TEA-UC: £141.80, 95% CI: £−135.60 to £408.10)] and slightly higher QALY gains (ITE-UC: −0.015, 95% CI: −0.057 to 0.026; TEA-UC: −0.003, 95% CI: −0.045 to 0.038). In the base case, UC was the most likely cost-effective option (probability <40% of ITE or TEA cost-effective at £20 000/QALY). Differences in total costs were attributable to intervention costs, number of visits to NHS consultants and knee surgery, which were higher in both ITE and TEA groups.

Conclusion

This is the first economic evaluation comparing usual physical therapy care vs enhanced exercise interventions for knee OA that involves greater exercise individualization, supervision and progression or that focuses on exercise and physical activity adherence over the longer term. Our findings show that UC is likely to be the most cost-effective option.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 93634563.

Trial protocol

Full details of the trial protocol can be found in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/15/254 doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-254

Effects of exercise and physical activity promotion: meta-analysis informing the 2018 EULAR recommendations for physical activity in people with rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis and hip/knee osteoarthritis

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of exercise and physical activity (PA) promotion on cardiovascular fitness, muscle strength, flexibility, neuromotor performance (eg, balance) and daily PA in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA) and hip/knee osteoarthritis (HOA/KOA).

Methods

systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) were performed searching the databases PubMed/Medline, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of Science, Emcare and PsycInfo until April 2017. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults (≥18 years) with RA, SpA and HOA/KOA, investigating the effects of exercise or PA promotion according to the public health PA recommendations by the American College of Sports Medicine. The time point of interest was the first assessment after the intervention period. If suitable, data were pooled in a MA using a random-effects model presented as standardised mean difference (SMD).

Results

The SR included 63 RCTs, of which 49 (3909 people with RA/SpA/HOA/KOA) were included in the MA. Moderate effects were found of aerobic exercises and resistance training on cardiovascular fitness (SMD 0.56 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.75)) and muscle strength (SMD 0.54 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.72)), respectively, but no effect of combined strength/aerobic/flexibility exercises on flexibility (SMD 0.12 (95% CI -0.16 to 0.41)). PA promotion interventions produced a small increase in PA behaviour (SMD 0.21 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.38)).

Conclusion

Exercises and PA promotion according to public health recommendations for PA improved cardiovascular fitness, muscle strength and PA behaviour, with moderate effect sizes in people with SpA, RA and HOA/KOA.

Trial registration number

CRD42017082131.

Effects of non-pharmacological conservative treatment on pain, range of motion and physical function in patients with mild to moderate hip osteoarthritis. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was to identify the effects of non-pharmacological conservative treatment on pain, range of motion and physical function in patients with mild to moderate hip osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

A systematic review based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

SETTING

We searched MEDLINE, PEDro, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials related to non-pharmacological conservative treatments for hip osteoarthritis with the following keywords: "hip osteoarthritis," "therapeutics," "physical therapy modalities," and "combined physical therapy". The PEDro scale was used for methodological quality assessment and the Oxford Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine scale was used to assess the level of evidence. Outcomes measures related to pain, hip range of motion and physical function were extracted from these studies.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies showed high level of evidence and only two showed low level of evidence. High quality of evidence showed that manual therapy and exercise therapy are effective in improving pain, hip range of motion and physical function. However, high quality studies based on combined therapies showed controversy in their effects on pain, hip range of motion and physical function.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise therapy and manual therapy and its combination with patient education provides benefits in pain and improvement in physical function. The effects of combined therapies remain unclear. Further investigation is necessary to improve the knowledge about the effects of non-pharmacological conservative treatments on pain, hip range of motion and physical function.

2018 EULAR recommendations for physical activity in people with inflammatory arthritis and osteoarthritis

Regular physical activity (PA) is increasingly promoted for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases as well as the general population. We evaluated if the public health recommendations for PA are applicable for people with inflammatory arthritis (iA; Rheumatoid Arthritis and Spondyloarthritis) and osteoarthritis (hip/knee OA) in order to develop evidence-based recommendations for advice and guidance on PA in clinical practice. The EULAR standardised operating procedures for the development of recommendations were followed. A task force (TF) (including rheumatologists, other medical specialists and physicians, health professionals, patient-representatives, methodologists) from 16 countries met twice. In the first TF meeting, 13 research questions to support a systematic literature review (SLR) were identified and defined. In the second meeting, the SLR evidence was presented and discussed before the recommendations, research agenda and education agenda were formulated. The TF developed and agreed on four overarching principles and 10 recommendations for PA in people with iA and OA. The mean level of agreement between the TF members ranged between 9.8 and 8.8. Given the evidence for its effectiveness, feasibility and safety, PA is advocated as integral part of standard care throughout the course of these diseases. Finally, the TF agreed on related research and education agendas. Evidence and expert opinion inform these recommendations to provide guidance in the development, conduct and evaluation of PA-interventions and promotion in people with iA and OA. It is advised that these recommendations should be implemented considering individual needs and national health systems.

Exercise interventions and patient beliefs for people with hip, knee or hip and knee osteoarthritis: a mixed methods review

BACKGROUND

Chronic peripheral joint pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) is extremely prevalent and a major cause of physical dysfunction and psychosocial distress. Exercise is recommended to reduce joint pain and improve physical function, but the effect of exercise on psychosocial function (health beliefs, depression, anxiety and quality of life) in this population is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To improve our understanding of the complex inter-relationship between pain, psychosocial effects, physical function and exercise.

SEARCH METHODS

Review authors searched 23 clinical, public health, psychology and social care databases and 25 other relevant resources including trials registers up to March 2016. We checked reference lists of included studies for relevant studies. We contacted key experts about unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

To be included in the quantitative synthesis, studies had to be randomised controlled trials of land- or water-based exercise programmes compared with a control group consisting of no treatment or non-exercise intervention (such as medication, patient education) that measured either pain or function and at least one psychosocial outcome (self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, quality of life). Participants had to be aged 45 years or older, with a clinical diagnosis of OA (as defined by the study) or self-reported chronic hip or knee (or both) pain (defined as more than six months' duration).To be included in the qualitative synthesis, studies had to have reported people's opinions and experiences of exercise-based programmes (e.g. their views, understanding, experiences and beliefs about the utility of exercise in the management of chronic pain/OA).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodology recommended by Cochrane for the quantitative analysis. For the qualitative analysis, we extracted verbatim quotes from study participants and synthesised studies of patients' views using framework synthesis. We then conducted an integrative review, synthesising the quantitative and qualitative data together.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one trials (2372 participants) met the inclusion criteria for quantitative synthesis. There were large variations in the exercise programme's content, mode of delivery, frequency and duration, participant's symptoms, duration of symptoms, outcomes measured, methodological quality and reporting. Comparator groups were varied and included normal care; education; and attention controls such as home visits, sham gel and wait list controls. Risk of bias was high in one and unclear risk in five studies regarding the randomisation process, high for 11 studies regarding allocation concealment, high for all 21 studies regarding blinding, and high for three studies and unclear for five studies regarding attrition. Studies did not provide information on adverse effects.There was moderate quality evidence that exercise reduced pain by an absolute percent reduction of 6% (95% confidence interval (CI) -9% to -4%, (9 studies, 1058 participants), equivalent to reducing (improving) pain by 1.25 points from 6.5 to 5.3 on a 0 to 20 scale and moderate quality evidence that exercise improved physical function by an absolute percent of 5.6% (95% CI -7.6% to 2.0%; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.27, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.17, equivalent to reducing (improving) WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) function on a 0 to 100 scale from 49.9 to 44.3) (13 studies, 1599 participants)). Self-efficacy was increased by an absolute percent of 1.66% (95% CI 1.08% to 2.20%), although evidence was low quality (SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.58, equivalent to improving the ExBeliefs score on a 17 to 85 scale from 64.3 to 65.4), with small benefits for depression from moderate quality evidence indicating an absolute percent reduction of 2.4% (95% CI -0.47% to 0.5%) (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.02, equivalent to improving depression measured using HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) on a 0 to 21 scale from 3.5 to 3.0) but no clinically or statistically significant effect on anxiety (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.05, 2% absolute improvement, 95% CI -5% to 1% equivalent to improving HADS anxiety on a 0 to 21 scale from 5.8 to 5.4; moderate quality evidence). Five studies measured the effect of exercise on health-related quality of life using the 36-item Short Form (SF-36) with statistically significant benefits for social function, increasing it by an absolute percent of 7.9% (95% CI 4.1% to 11.6%), equivalent to increasing SF-36 social function on a 0 to 100 scale from 73.6 to 81.5, although the evidence was low quality. Evidence was downgraded due to heterogeneity of measures, limitations with blinding and lack of detail regarding interventions. For 20/21 studies, there was a high risk of bias with blinding as participants self-reported and were not blinded to their participation in an exercise intervention.Twelve studies (with 6 to 29 participants) met inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis. Their methodological rigour and quality was generally good. From the patients' perspectives, ways to improve the delivery of exercise interventions included: provide better information and advice about the safety and value of exercise; provide exercise tailored to individual's preferences, abilities and needs; challenge inappropriate health beliefs and provide better support.An integrative review, which compared the findings from quantitative trials with low risk of bias and the implications derived from the high-quality studies in the qualitative synthesis, confirmed the importance of these implications.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chronic hip and knee pain affects all domains of people's lives. People's beliefs about chronic pain shape their attitudes and behaviours about how to manage their pain. People are confused about the cause of their pain, and bewildered by its variability and randomness. Without adequate information and advice from healthcare professionals, people do not know what they should and should not do, and, as a consequence, avoid activity for fear of causing harm. Participation in exercise programmes may slightly improve physical function, depression and pain. It may slightly improve self-efficacy and social function, although there is probably little or no difference in anxiety. Providing reassurance and clear advice about the value of exercise in controlling symptoms, and opportunities to participate in exercise programmes that people regard as enjoyable and relevant, may encourage greater exercise participation, which brings a range of health benefits to a large population of people.

The importance of dose in land-based supervised exercise for people with hip osteoarthritis. A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare effects of land-based exercise programmes with high vs low or uncertain compliance with dose recommendations among people with hip osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

A systematic review with meta-analyses of supervised exercise programmes in people with symptomatic hip OA was conducted. Dose of the exercise interventions was evaluated according to the American College of Sports Medicine's (ACSM) recommendations for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength and flexibility in healthy adults. Compliance ratios with the recommendations were calculated. Standardized Mean Differences (SMDs) were calculated in meta-analyses for the outcomes pain and self-reported physical function. Outcome effects were compared between the sub-groups of studies with interventions with "high" vs "uncertain" compliance with the ACSM recommendations.

RESULTS

Twelve studies including 1202 participants were included. Seven were categorized with "high" and five with "uncertain" compliance with the ACSM recommendations. Ten studies had an overall low risk of bias. Comparing exercise with no exercise, the pooled SMD for pain was -0.42 (95% CI -0.58, -0.26) in the high compliance group, favouring exercise. In the uncertain compliance group the pooled SMD was 0.04 (95% CI -0.24, 0.31). For physical function the SMD was -0.41 (95% CI -0.58, -0.24) in the high compliance group and -0.23 (95% CI -0.52, 0.06) in the uncertain compliance group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that land-based supervised exercise interventions with high compliance to the ACSM recommendations result in significantly larger improvements in pain and non-significantly larger improvement in self-reported physical function compared with land-based supervised exercise interventions with uncertain compliance.

Hip Pain and Mobility Deficits-Hip Osteoarthritis: Revision 2017

The Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The purpose of these revised clinical practice guidelines is to review recent peer-reviewed literature and make recommendations related to hip pain and mobility deficits. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017;47(6):A1-A37. doi:10.2519/jospt.2017.0301.

Supervised neuromuscular exercise prior to hip and knee replacement: 12-month clinical effect and cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial

Background

There are indications of beneficial short-term effect of pre-operative exercise in reducing pain and improving activity of daily living after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. Though, information from studies conducting longer follow-ups and economic evaluations of exercise prior to THR and TKR is needed. The aim of the study was to analyse 12-month clinical effect and cost-utility of supervised neuromuscular exercise prior to THR and TKR surgery.

Methods

The study was conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial including 165 patients scheduled for standard THR or TKR at a hospital located in a rural area of Denmark. The patients were randomised to replacement surgery with or without an 8-week preoperative supervised neuromuscular exercise program (Clinical Trials registration no.: NCT01003756). Clinical effect was measured with Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were based on EQ-5D-3L and Danish preference weights. Resource use was extracted from national registries and valued using standard tariffs (2012-EUR). Incremental net benefit was analysed to estimate the probability for the intervention being cost effective for a range of threshold values. A health care sector perspective was applied.

Results

HOOS/KOOS quality of life [8.25 (95% CI, 0.42 to 16.10)] and QALYs [0.04 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.07)] were statistically significantly improved. Effect-sizes ranged between 0.09-0.59 for HOOS/KOOS subscales. Despite including an intervention cost of €326 per patient, there was no difference in total cost between groups [€132 (95% CI −3942 to 3679)]. At a threshold of €40,000, preoperative exercise was found to be cost effective at 84% probability.

Conclusion

Preoperative supervised neuromuscular exercise for 8 weeks was found to be cost-effective in patients scheduled for THR and TKR surgery at conventional thresholds for willingness to pay. One-year clinical effects were small to moderate and favoured the intervention group, but only statistically significant for quality of life measures.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01003756) October 28, 2009.

Exercise Training in Treatment and Rehabilitation of Hip Osteoarthritis: A 12-Week Pilot Trial

Introduction. Osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip is one of the major causes of pain and disability in the older population. Although exercise is an effective treatment for knee OA, there is lack of evidence regarding hip OA. The aim of this trial was to test the safety and feasibility of a specifically designed exercise program in relieving hip pain and improving function in hip OA participants and to evaluate various methods to measure changes in their physical functioning. Materials and Methods. 13 women aged ≥ 65 years with hip OA were recruited in this 12-week pilot study. Results. Pain declined significantly over 30% from baseline, and joint function and health-related quality of life improved slightly. Objective assessment of physical functioning showed statistically significant improvement in the maximal isometric leg extensor strength by 20% and in the hip extension range of motion by 30%. Conclusions. The exercise program was found to be safe and feasible. The present evidence indicates that the exercise program is effective in the short term. However, adequate powered RCTs are needed to determine effects of long-term exercise therapy on pain and progression of hip OA.

A Water Rehabilitation Program in Patients with Hip Osteoarthritis Before and After Total Hip Replacement

BACKGROUND Pain associated with coxarthrosis, typically occurring in middle-aged and elderly patients, very commonly causes considerable limitation of motor fitness and dependence on pharmacotherapy. This article provides an assessment of a rehabilitation program with tailored water exercises in patients with osteoarthritis before and after total hip replacement. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 192 patients (the mean age 61.03±10.89) suffering from hip osteoarthritis (OA) were evaluated before and after total hip replacement (THR). The clinical study covered measurements of hip active ranges of motion (HAROM) and the forces generated by pelvis stabilizer muscles. Pain intensity was assessed according to analogue-visual scale of pain (VAS) and according to the Modified Laitinen Questionnaire. The patients were divided into 6 groups (4 treatment and 2 control). We compared 2 rehabilitation programs using kinesitherapy and low-frequency magnetic field. One of them also had specially designed exercises in the water. Statistical analysis was carried out at the significance level α=0.05. This was a cross-sectional study. RESULTS A positive effect of water exercises on a number of parameters was found in patients with OA both before and after total hip replacement surgery. We noted a significant reduction of pain (p<0.001), increased ranges of motion and muscle strength, and reduced use of medicines (NASAIDs) (p<0.001). A correlation was found between the degree of degenerative deforming lesions and the effects of the treatment process (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS 1. The rehabilitation program including water exercises most significantly reduced pain in patients with OA before and after total hip replacement surgery. 2. Inclusion of water exercises in a rehabilitation program can reduce the use of medicines in patient with OA and after THR.

Ottawa Panel evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for therapeutic exercise in the management of hip osteoarthritis

Objectives:

The primary objective is to identify effective land-based therapeutic exercise interventions and provide evidence-based recommendations for managing hip osteoarthritis. A secondary objective is to develop an Ottawa Panel evidence-based clinical practice guideline for hip osteoarthritis.

Methods:

The search strategy and modified selection criteria from a Cochrane review were used. Studies included hip osteoarthritis patients in comparative controlled trials with therapeutic exercise interventions. An Expert Panel arrived at a Delphi survey consensus to endorse the recommendations. The Ottawa Panel hierarchical alphabetical grading system (A, B, C+, C, D, D+, or D-) considered the study design (level I: randomized controlled trial and level II: controlled clinical trial), statistical significance ( p < 0.5), and clinical importance (⩾15% improvement).

Results:

Four high-quality studies were included, which demonstrated that variations of strength training, stretching, and flexibility exercises are generally effective for improving the management of hip osteoarthritis. Strength training exercises displayed the greatest improvements for pain (Grade A), disability (Grades A and C+), physical function (Grade A), stiffness (Grade A), and range of motion (Grade A) within a short time period (8–24 weeks). Stretching also greatly improved physical function (Grade A), and flexibility exercises improved pain (Grade A), range of motion (Grade A), physical function (Grade A), and stiffness (Grade C+).

Conclusion:

The Ottawa Panel recommends land-based therapeutic exercise, notably strength training, for management of hip osteoarthritis in reducing pain, stiffness and self-reported disability, and improving physical function and range of motion.

Effects of medical exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial with six months follow-up. A pilot study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is no consensus regarding what type of exercises, combination of exercises or exercise dosage is most effective in patients with long-term hip arthrosis. The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of two different exercise programs related to dose-response relationships.

METHOD

Prospective randomized controlled clinical trial with 6 months follow where 33 participants were randomly assigned to either high repetitive, high dosage medical exercise therapy (MET) (n = 16) or low dosage exercise therapy (ET) (n = 17). Primary outcomes are pain using a visual analog scale (VAS) and function using a functional assessment questionnaire (WOMAC).

RESULTS

Patients were equal at baseline. Two patients (6%) dropped out during the treatment period. There were no difference between groups after end of treatment nor at 6 months follow up. However, there were significant differences within each exercise group at end of treatment.

CONCLUSION

In this pilot study, we were not able to show any difference between MET and ET. More research is needed with a larger patient population and a more extensive exercise period similar to other studies that are published regarding dose-response effects. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01700933.

Long-Term Effect of Exercise Therapy and Patient Education on Impairments and Activity Limitations in People With Hip Osteoarthritis: Secondary Outcome Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The effect of exercise on specific impairments and activity limitations in people with hip osteoarthritis (OA) is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to evaluate the long-term effect of exercise therapy and patient education on range of motion (ROM), muscle strength, physical fitness, walking capacity, and pain during walking in people with hip OA.

DESIGN

This was a secondary outcome analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

The setting was a university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred nine people with clinically and radiographically evident hip OA were randomly allocated to receive both exercise therapy and patient education (exercise group) or patient education only (control group).

INTERVENTION

All participants attended a patient education program consisting of 3 group meetings led by 2 physical therapists. Two other physical therapists were responsible for providing the exercise therapy program, consisting of 2 or 3 weekly sessions of strengthening, functional, and stretching exercises over 12 weeks. Both interventions were conducted at a sports medicine clinic.

MEASUREMENTS

Outcome measures included ROM, isokinetic muscle strength, predicted maximal oxygen consumption determined with the Astrand bicycle ergometer test, and distance and pain during the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Follow-up assessments were conducted 4, 10, and 29 months after enrollment by 5 physical therapists who were unaware of group allocations.

RESULTS

No significant group differences were found for ROM, muscle strength, predicted maximal oxygen consumption, or distance during the 6MWT over the follow-up period, but the exercise group had less pain during the 6MWT than the control group at 10 months (mean difference=-8.5 mm; 95% confidence interval=-16.1, -0.9) and 29 months (mean difference=-9.3 mm; 95% confidence interval=-18.1, -0.6).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of the study were reduced statistical power and 53% rate of adherence to the exercise therapy program.

CONCLUSIONS

The previously described effect of exercise on self-reported function was not reflected by beneficial results for ROM, muscle strength, physical fitness, and walking capacity, but exercise in addition to patient education resulted in less pain during walking in the long term.

Cost-Effectiveness of Physical Therapy Only and of Usual Care for Various Health Conditions: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Given continually rising health care costs, interventions of health care providers should be cost-effective.

PURPOSE

This review aimed to summarize current cost-effectiveness of physical therapy. Specific aims were: (1) to analyze cost-effectiveness of physical therapy only compared with usual care only, (2) to analyze cost-effectiveness of physical therapy added to usual care compared with usual care only, and (3) to specify in which health conditions physical therapy only or physical therapy added to usual care was cost-effective.

DATA SOURCES

Topic-related systematic reviews were searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, and Cochrane Library and manually.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies published between 1998 and 2014 that investigated the cost-effectiveness of interventions carried out by physical therapists were reviewed. The methodological quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment for intervention studies and with the Quality of Health Economic Analyses Scale.

DATA EXTRACTION

Effectiveness and cost data for calculating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and the original authors' conclusions were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The 18 included studies presented low risk of bias and contained 8 comparisons of physical therapy only with usual care only and 11 comparisons of physical therapy added to usual care with usual care only. Based on ICERs, physical therapy only or added to usual care was cost-effective in 9 out of the 19 comparisons and in 10 comparisons according to the original authors' conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Physical therapy only or added to usual care implies improved health in almost all studies. The cost-effectiveness of such interventions was demonstrated in half of the studies. This result might have been influenced by the fact that different definitions of the notion of "cost-effectiveness" exist.

Rehabilitation (exercise and strength training) and osteoarthritis: A critical narrative review

Rehabilitation is widely recommended in national and international guidelines for managing osteoarthritis (OA) in primary care settings. According to the 2014 OA Research Society International (OARSI) recommendations, rehabilitation is even considered the core treatment of OA and is recommended for all patients. Rehabilitation for OA widely includes land- and water-based exercise, strength training, weight management, self-management and education, biomechanical interventions, and physically active lifestyle. We performed a critical narrative review of the efficacy and safety of rehabilitation for managing OA and discuss evidence-based international recommendations. The process of article selection was unsystematic. Articles were selected based on authors' expertise, self-knowledge, and reflective practice. For the purpose of the review, we focused on land- and water-based exercise and strength training for knee, hip and hand OA. Other aspects of rehabilitation in OA are treated elsewhere in this special issue. Exercise therapy is widely recommended for managing knee, hip and hand OA. However, the level of evidence varies according to OA location. Overall, consistent evidence suggests that exercise therapy and specific strengthening exercise or strength training for the lower limb reduce pain and improve physical function in knee OA. Evidence for other OA sites are less consistent. Therefore, because of the lack of specific studies, recommendations for hip and hand OA are mainly derived from studies of knee OA. In addition, no recommendations have been established regarding the exercise regimen. The efficacy and safety of exercise therapy and strength training need to be further evaluated in randomized controlled trials of patients with hip and hand OA. The optimal delivery of exercise programs also has to be more clearly defined.

The effects of manual therapy or exercise therapy or both in people with hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether manual therapy or exercise therapy or both is beneficial for people with hip osteoarthritis in terms of reduced pain, improved physical function and improved quality of life.

METHODS

Databases such as Medline, AMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTSDiscus, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and SCOPUS were searched from their inception till September 2015. Two authors independently extracted and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. Standardised mean differences for outcome measures (pain, physical function and quality of life) were used to calculate effect sizes. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for assessing the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Seven trials (886 participants) that met the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. There was high quality evidence that exercise therapy was beneficial at post-treatment (pain-SMD-0.27,95%CI-0.5to-0.04;physical function-SMD-0.29,95%CI-0.47to-0.11) and follow-up (pain-SMD-0.24,95%CI- 0.41to-0.06; physical function-SMD-0.33,95%CI-0.5to-0.15). There was low quality evidence that manual therapy was beneficial at post-treatment (pain-SMD-0.71,95%CI-1.08to-0.33; physical function-SMD-0.71,95%CI-1.08to-0.33) and follow-up (pain-SMD-0.43,95%CI-0.8to-0.06; physical function-SMD-0.47,95%CI-0.84to-0.1). Low quality evidence indicated that combined treatment was beneficial at post-treatment (pain-SMD-0.43,95%CI-0.78to-0.08; physical function-SMD-0.38,95%CI-0.73to-0.04) but not at follow-up (pain-SMD0.25,95%CI-0.35to0.84; physical function-SMD0.09,95%CI-0.5to0.68). There was no effect of any interventions on quality of life.

CONCLUSION

An Exercise therapy intervention provides short-term as well as long-term benefits in terms of reduction in pain, and improvement in physical function among people with hip osteoarthritis. The observed magnitude of the treatment effect would be considered small to moderate.

Effects of exercise and manual therapy on pain associated with hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To explore the effects of exercise (water-based or land-based) and/or manual therapies on pain in adults with clinically and/or radiographically diagnosed hip osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed, with patient reported pain assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) or the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscale. Data were grouped by follow-up time (0-3 months=short term; 4-12 months=medium term and; >12 months=long term), and standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs were used to establish intervention effect sizes. Study quality was assessed using modified PEDro scores.

RESULTS

19 trials were included. Four studies showed short-term benefits favouring water-based exercise over minimal control using the WOMAC pain subscale (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.10). Six studies supported a short-term benefit of land-based exercise compared to minimal control on VAS assessed pain (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.29). There were no medium (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.03) or long (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.06) term benefits of exercise therapy, or benefit of combining exercise therapy with manual therapy (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.88 to 0.13) when compared to minimal control.

CONCLUSIONS

Best available evidence indicates that exercise therapy (whether land-based or water-based) is more effective than minimal control in managing pain associated with hip OA in the short term. Larger high-quality RCTs are needed to establish the effectiveness of exercise and manual therapies in the medium and long term.

Identifying potential working mechanisms behind the positive effects of exercise therapy on pain and function in osteoarthritis; a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Although physical exercise is the commonly recommended for osteoarthritis (OA) patients, the working mechanism behind the positive effects of physical exercise on pain and function is a black box phenomenon. In the present study we aimed to identify possible mediators in the relation between physical exercise and improvements of pain and function in OA patients.

DESIGN

A systematic search for all studies evaluating the effects of physical exercise in OA patients and select those that additionally reported the change in any physiological factor from pre-to post-exercise.

RESULTS

In total, 94 studies evaluating 112 intervention groups were included. Most included studies evaluated subjects with solely knee OA (96 out of 112 groups). Based on the measured physiological factors within the included studies, 12 categories of possible mediators were formed. Muscle strength and ROM/flexibility were the most measured categories of possible mediators with 61 and 21 intervention groups measuring one or more physiological factors within these categories, respectively. 60% (31 out of 52) of the studies showed a significant increase in knee extensor muscle strength and 71% (22 out of 31) in knee flexor muscle strength over the intervention period. All 5 studies evaluating extension impairments and 10 out of 12 studies (83%) measuring proprioception found a significant change from pre-to post-intervention.

CONCLUSION

An increase of upper leg strength, a decrease of extension impairments and improvement in proprioception were identified as possible mediators in the positive association between physical exercise and OA symptoms.

Physical exercise as non-pharmacological treatment of chronic pain: Why and when

Chronic pain broadly encompasses both objectively defined conditions and idiopathic conditions that lack physical findings. Despite variance in origin or pathogenesis, these conditions are similarly characterized by chronic pain, poor physical function, mobility limitations, depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance, and they are treated alone or in combination by pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic approaches, such as physical activity (aerobic conditioning, muscle strengthening, flexibility training, and movement therapies). Physical activity improves general health, disease risk, and progression of chronic illnesses such as cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and obesity. When applied to chronic pain conditions within appropriate parameters (frequency, duration, and intensity), physical activity significantly improves pain and related symptoms. For chronic pain, strict guidelines for physical activity are lacking, but frequent movement is preferable to sedentary behavior. This gives considerable freedom in prescribing physical activity treatments, which are most successful when tailored individually, progressed slowly, and account for physical limitations, psychosocial needs, and available resources.

A phase II trial for the efficacy of physiotherapy intervention for early-onset hip osteoarthritis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Early-onset hip osteoarthritis is commonly seen in people undergoing hip arthroscopy and is associated with increased pain, reduced ability to participate in physical activity, reduced quality of life and reduced range of motion and muscle strength. Despite this, the efficacy of non-surgical interventions such as exercise therapies remains unknown. The primary aim is to establish the feasibility of a phase III randomised controlled trial investigating a targeted physiotherapy intervention for people with early-onset hip osteoarthritis. The secondary aims are to determine the size of treatment effects of a physiotherapy intervention, targeted to improve hip joint range and hip-related symptoms in early-onset hip osteoarthritis following hip arthroscopy, compared to a health-education control.

Methods

This protocol describes a randomised, assessor- and participant-blind, controlled clinical trial. We will include 20 participants who are (i) aged between 18 and 50 years; (ii) have undergone hip arthroscopy during the past six to 12 months; (iii) have early-onset hip osteoarthritis (defined as chondrolabral pathology) at the time of hip arthroscopy; and (iv) experience hip-related pain during activities. Primary outcome will be the feasibility of a phase III clinical trial. Secondary outcomes will be (i) perceived global change score; (ii) hip-related symptoms (measured using the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) pain subscale, activity subscale, and sport and recreation subscale); (iii) hip quality of life (measured using the HOOS quality of life subscale and International Hip Outcome tool; (iv) hip muscle strength and (v) hip range of motion. The physiotherapy intervention is semi-standardised, including joint and soft tissue mobilisation and stretching, hip and trunk muscle retraining and functional and activity-specific retraining and education. The control intervention encompasses individualised health education, with the same frequency and duration as the intervention. The trial primary end-point is the conclusion of the 12-week intervention, and follow-up measures will be collected at the 12-week post-baseline assessment.

Discussion

The findings of this study will provide guidance regarding the feasibility of a full-scale phase III randomised controlled trial, prior to its undertaking.

Trial registration

The trial protocol was registered with the Australian Clinical Trials Registry (number: 12614000426684) on 17 April 2014.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-014-0543-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Exercise in osteoarthritis: moving from prescription to adherence

Exercise is recommended for the management of osteoarthritis (OA) in all clinical guidelines irrespective of disease severity, pain levels, and functional status. For knee OA, evidence supports the benefits of various types of exercise for improving pain and function in the short term. However, there is much less research investigating the effects of exercise in patients with OA at other joints such as the hip and hand. It is important to note that while the magnitude of exercise benefits may be considered small to moderate, these effects are comparable to reported estimates for simple analgesics and oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for OA pain but exercise has much fewer side effects. Exercise prescription should be individualized based on assessment findings and be patient centered involving shared decision making between the patient and clinician. Given that patient adherence to exercise declines over time, appropriate attention should be pain as reduced adherence attenuates the benefits of exercise. Given this, barriers and facilitators to exercise should be identified and strategies to maximize long-term adherence to exercise implemented.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the hip

BACKGROUND

Current international treatment guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis (OA) report are based on limited evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with hip OA in terms of reduced joint pain and improved physical function and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched five databases from inception up to February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting people with hip OA and comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercises conducted in water) with a non-exercise group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently selected studies for inclusion. We resolved disagreements through consensus. Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. We conducted analyses on continuous outcomes (pain, physical function and quality of life) and dichotomous outcomes (proportion of study withdrawals).

MAIN RESULTS

We considered that seven of the 10 included RCTs had a low risk of bias. However, the results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias as none of the RCTs were able to blind participants to treatment allocation and, while most RCTs reported blinded outcome assessment, pain, physical function and quality of life were participant self reported. One of the 10 RCTs was only reported as a conference abstract and did not provide sufficient data for the evaluation of bias risk.High-quality evidence from nine trials (549 participants) indicated that exercise reduced pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.55 to -0.20) and improved physical function (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.05) immediately after treatment. Pain and physical function were estimated to be 29 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no pain or loss of physical function) in the control group; exercise reduced pain by an equivalent of 8 points (95% CI 4 to 11 points; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6) and improved physical function by an equivalent of 7 points (95% CI 1 to 12 points; NNTB 6). Only three small studies (183 participants) evaluated quality of life, with overall low quality evidence, with no benefit of exercise demonstrated (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.36). Quality of life was estimated to be 50 points on a norm-based mean (standard deviation (SD)) score of 50 (10) in the general population in the control group; exercise improved quality of life by 0 points. Moderate-quality evidence from seven trials (715 participants) indicated an increased likelihood of withdrawal from the exercise allocation (event rate 6%) compared with the control group (event rate 3%), but this difference was not significant (risk difference 1%; 95% CI -1% to 4%). Of the five studies reporting adverse events, each study reported only one or two events and all were related to increased pain attributed to the exercise programme.The reduction in pain was sustained at least three to six months after ceasing monitored treatment (five RCTs, 391 participants): pain (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.18). Pain was estimated to be 29 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no pain) in the control group, the improvement in pain translated to a sustained reduction in pain intensity of 8 points (95% CI 4 to 12 points) compared with the control group (0 to 100 scale). The improvement in physical function was also sustained (five RCTs, 367 participants): physical function (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.16). Physical function was estimated to be 24 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no loss of physical function) in the control group, the improvement translated to a mean of 7 points (95% CI 4 to 13) compared with the control group.Only five of the 10 RCTs exclusively recruited people with symptomatic hip OA (419 participants). There was no significant difference in pain or physical function outcomes compared with five studies recruiting participants with hip or knee OA (130 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pooling the results of these 10 RCTs demonstrated that land-based therapeutic exercise programmes can reduce pain and improve physical function among people with symptomatic hip OA.

Exercise therapy may postpone total hip replacement surgery in patients with hip osteoarthritis: a long-term follow-up of a randomised trial

Background

Exercise treatment is recommended for all patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA), but its effect on the long-term need for total hip replacement (THR) is unknown.

Methods

We conducted a long-term follow-up of a randomised trial investigating the efficacy of exercise therapy and patient education versus patient education only on the 6-year cumulative survival of the native hip to THR in 109 patients with symptomatic and radiographic hip OA. Results regarding the primary outcome measure of the trial, self-reported pain at 16 months follow-up, have been reported previously.

Results

There were no group differences at baseline. The response rate at follow-up was 94%. 22 patients in the group receiving both exercise therapy and patient education and 31 patients in the group receiving patient education only underwent THR during the follow-up period, giving a 6-year cumulative survival of the native hip of 41% and 25%, respectively (p=0.034). The HR for survival of the native hip was 0.56 (CI 0.32 to 0.96) for the exercise therapy group compared with the control group. Median time to THR was 5.4 and 3.5 years, respectively. The exercise therapy group had better self-reported hip function prior to THR or end of study, but no significant differences were found for pain and stiffness.

Conclusions

Our findings in this explanatory study suggest that exercise therapy in addition to patient education can reduce the need for THR by 44% in patients with hip OA. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00319423 (original project protocol) and NCT01338532 (additional protocol for long-term follow-up).

EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee osteoarthritis

The objective was to develop evidence -based recommendations and a research and educational agenda for the non-pharmacological management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). The multidisciplinary task force comprised 21 experts: nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, rheumatologists, orthopaedic surgeons, general practitioner, psychologist, dietician, clinical epidemiologist and patient representatives. After a preliminary literature review, a first task force meeting and five Delphi rounds, provisional recommendations were formulated in order to perform a systematic review. A literature search of Medline and eight other databases was performed up to February 2012. Evidence was graded in categories I-IV and agreement with the recommendations was determined through scores from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). Eleven evidence-based recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee OA were developed, concerning the following nine topics: assessment, general approach, patient information and education, lifestyle changes, exercise, weight loss, assistive technology and adaptations, footwear and work. The average level of agreement ranged between 8.0 and 9.1. The proposed research agenda included an overall need for more research into non-pharmacological interventions for hip OA, moderators to optimise individualised treatment, healthy lifestyle with economic evaluation and long-term follow-up, and the prevention and reduction of work disability. Proposed educational activities included the required skills to teach, initiate and establish lifestyle changes. The 11 recommendations provide guidance on the delivery of non-pharmacological interventions to people with hip or knee OA. More research and educational activities are needed, particularly in the area of lifestyle changes.

Effect of exercise and weight loss in people who have hip osteoarthritis and are overweight or obese: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disorder in the world and is recognized as a substantial source of disability. For people with OA of the knee, exercise in combination with weight loss is a proven, effective, conservative treatment option, yet evidence is lacking for people with hip OA.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to obtain preliminary evidence of the effect of a program of exercise in combination with weight loss on physical function in people who have hip OA and are overweight or obese.

DESIGN

This investigation was a prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Thirty-five people who were 25 years or older, had clinical and radiological evidence of hip OA, and were overweight or obese (body mass index of >25 kg/m(2)) were included. They participated in an 8-month program of exercise in combination with weight loss. A body mass index of 40 kg/m(2) was used as the upper limit. The primary outcome was self-reported physical function, as measured with a subscale of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Secondary outcome measures included pain and walking tests as quantitative measures of function.

RESULTS

Participation in the combination program resulted in a 32.6% improvement in self-reported physical function after 8 months, a finding that could be considered clinically relevant. Significant improvements also were seen in pain and on walking tests.

LIMITATIONS

The lack of a control group was a limitation of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

This appears to be the first study investigating the effect of exercise and weight loss as a combination treatment in people with hip OA. The results provide preliminary evidence that this combination treatment is effective in people with hip OA.

Determinants of pain and functioning in hip osteoarthritis - a two-year prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To identify predictors of pain and disability in hip osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

A prospective analysis of determinants of pain and functioning in hip osteoarthritis.

STUDY SETTING

Rehabilitation clinic in a central hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 118 men and women aged 55-80 years who had radiologically diagnosed hip osteoarthritis and associated clinical symptoms and participated in a randomized controlled trial.

MAIN MEASURES

The self-reported disease-specific pain and physical function were assessed using the pain and functioning subscales of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis index. The self-reported generic physical and mental functioning were assessed by using the Finnish-validated SF-36-item Health Survey RAND-36 subscales for function and physical and mental component summary scores. Outcome measures were recorded at 0, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months.

RESULTS

Multivariate linear mixed model analyses revealed that lower disease-specific pain score and better functioning (WOMAC) were predicted by higher educational level (9.61 (3.15 to 16.07); 9.07 (2.05 to 16.09)), supervised exercise training (-10.13 (-17.87 to -2.39); -11.58 (-19.40 to -3.77)), habitual conditioning physical activity (-0.48 (-0.96 to -0.01); -0.39 (-0.84 to 0.05)), absence of comorbidities (-6.30 (-12.35 to -0.24); -7.87 (-14.45 to -1.30)) and absence of additional knee osteoarthritis (-7.62 (-13.87 to -1.36); -8.02 (-14.81 to -1.23)), respectively. The same factors, except for the comorbidities, also predicted general physical functioning score (RAND-36).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher education, absence of knee osteoarthritis and comorbidities, supervised exercise training and habitual conditioning physical activity predicted a lower presence of pain and better functional status in patients with hip osteoarthritis.

Physiatric approaches to pain management in osteoarthritis: a review of the evidence of effectiveness

SUMMARY Osteoarthritis (OA), which is highly prevalent in the general population, is one of the leading causes of pain and physical disability. A large number of nonpharmacological interventions are available for the management of pain in patients with OA. These include education and self-management, weight reduction, various forms of exercises, physical agents/modalities, complementary therapies, manual therapy, unloading strategies such as braces and orthoses, and balneotherapy. The aim of this article is to assess the evidence of effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions pertaining to physiatry to identify best practices for pain management in OA.