Efficacy of a progressive walking program and glucosamine sulphate supplementation on osteoarthritic symptoms of the hip and knee: a feasibility trial

Reporting quality of interventions using a wearable activity tracker to improve physical activity in patients with inflammatory arthritis or osteoarthritis: a systematic review

To assess the reporting quality of interventions aiming at promoting physical activity (PA) using a wearable activity tracker (WAT) in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) or hip/knee osteoarthritis (OA). A systematic search was performed in eight databases (including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) for studies published between 2000 and 2022. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data on study characteristics and the reporting of the PA intervention using a WAT using the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) (12 items) and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) E-Health checklist (16 items). The reporting quality of each study was expressed as a percentage of reported items of the total CERT and CONSORT E-Health (50% or less = poor; 51–79% = moderate; and 80–100% = good reporting quality). Sixteen studies were included; three involved patients with IA and 13 with OA. Reporting quality was poor in 6/16 studies and moderate in 10/16 studies, according to the CERT and poor in 8/16 and moderate in 8/16 studies following the CONSORT E-Health checklist. Poorly reported checklist items included: the description of decision rule(s) for determining progression and the starting level, the number of adverse events and how adherence or fidelity was assessed. In clinical trials on PA interventions using a WAT in patients with IA or OA, the reporting quality of delivery process is moderate to poor. The poor reporting quality of the progression and tailoring of the PA programs makes replication difficult. Improvements in reporting quality are necessary.

Total Knee Arthroplasty: Fitness, Heart Disease Risk, and Quality of Life

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may decrease coronary heart disease (CHD) risk in patients with advanced osteoarthritis by reducing pain and allowing for a more active lifestyle. We examined cardiovascular fitness, CHD risk factors, and quality of life in patients for 1 year after TKA compared with matched controls who did not undergo surgery. A total of 14 patients, 7 surgery patients and 7 matched controls, were tested for measurements of body composition, knee range of motion, resting blood pressure, strength testing, a maximal exercise test, quality-of-life questionnaires (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 and Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]), and activity monitoring, fasting blood glucose, and lipids at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery or baseline testing. Comparison between the two groups was analyzed. Twelve months after surgery, patients with TKA had significantly (p < 0.05) lower pain scores, increased fat free mass, lower resting mean arterial pressure, and improved scores on the KOOS for pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, and quality of life. Initially, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and body fat percentage were reduced in the TKA group but returned to baseline at 12 months. The results of this study indicate that there are immediate and long-term improvements in pain and quality of life in patients with TKA, but physical function, exercise capacity, leg strength, and some lipid profiles may take longer than 12 months to improve. This is a level II, prospective, Therapeutic study, comparative study.

Use of Wearable Activity Trackers to Improve Physical Activity Behavior in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Wearable activity trackers (WATs) could be a promising strategy to improve physical activity in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). The aim was to assess the adherence to and effectiveness of WATs to increase physical activity levels in patients with RMDs.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify all cohorts and controlled trials evaluating WATs in patients with RMDs, published between 2000 and 2018, by searching Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane. Data collected pertained to adherence, effectiveness on physical activity, or effectiveness on symptoms (pain, function, quality of life, or fatigue). Meta-analyses were performed with a random effects model.

RESULTS

Of 2,806 references, 17 studies were included, with a total of 1,588 patients: 8 studies (47%) in osteoarthritis, 5 (29%) in low-back pain, and 3 (18%) in inflammatory arthritis. Adherence assessed in 4 studies was high (weighted mean ± SD time worn was 92.7% ± 4.6%). A significant increase in physical activity was noted (mean difference 1,520 steps [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 580, 2,460], I² = 77%; or 16 minutes [95% CI 2, 29] of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, I² = 0%). A significant increase in pain was found for long interventions (>8 weeks) (standardized mean difference 0.25 [95% CI 0.07, 0.43], I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

WATs in patients with RMDs had a high short-term adherence, with a significant increase in the number of steps and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, although pain should be monitored. WATs may be an effective option to increase physical activity in this at-risk population.

Impact of Physical Activity in Cardiovascular and Musculoskeletal Health: Can Motion Be Medicine?

Physical activity is a well-known therapeutic tool for various types of medical conditions, including vasculopathic diseases such as coronary artery disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and obesity. Additionally, increased physical activity has been proposed as a therapy to improve musculoskeletal health; however, there are conflicting reports about physical activity potentially leading to degenerative musculoskeletal disease, especially osteoarthritis (OA). Additionally, although physical activity is known to have its benefits, it is unclear as to what amount of physical activity is the most advantageous. Too much, as well as not enough exercise can have negative consequences. This could impact how physicians advise their patients about exercise intensity. Multiple studies have evaluated the effect of physical activity on various aspects of health. However, there is a paucity of systematic studies which review cardiovascular and musculoskeletal health as outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to assess how physical activity impacts these aspects of health. Specifically, we evaluated the effect of various levels of physical activity on: 1) cardiovascular and 2) musculoskeletal health. The review revealed that physical activity may decrease cardiovascular disease and improve OA symptoms, and therefore, motion can be considered a “medicine”. However, because heavy activity can potentially lead to increased OA risk, physicians should advise their patients that excessive activity can also potentially impact their health negatively, and should be done in moderation, until further study.

Objectively Measured Physical Activity and Symptoms Change in Knee Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to quantify the association between daily physical activity measured by accelerometer and 1-year changes in symptoms among people with knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Participants from the Osteoarthritis Initiative had knee radiographs and physical activity assessed using GT1M ActiGraph (Pensacola, FL) uniaxial accelerometers at the 48-month visit. Physical activity was calculated and categorized as tertiles of average daily minutes in light and moderate-to-vigorous activity. Outcomes were 1-year change in symptoms measured by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities scales, including pain, stiffness, and physical function. Adjusted multivariable linear models estimated the relationship between tertiles of light or moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and changes in knee symptoms.

RESULTS

Among 1059 participants (55% were women; mean age, 66 ± 9 years), greater time in light activity was associated with a trend toward declined physical function (P = .01). Greater time in daily moderate-to-vigorous activity also was associated with declined physical function (P = .01) and increased pain (P = .08). None of these average changes in symptoms reached minimally important clinical differences. However, greater daily time in both activities was associated with a higher probability of worsening symptoms among persons with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 4 osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Objectively measured daily activity was not associated with 1-year symptom improvements among community-dwelling adults with knee osteoarthritis. In those with advanced disease (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 4), greater daily minutes in physical activity were associated with worsening symptoms. How best to implement exercise regimens in persons with advanced knee osteoarthritis to reduce the deleterious impact on symptoms needs to be explored.

High-intensity versus low-intensity physical activity or exercise in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Exercise or physical activity is recommended for improving pain and functional status in people with knee or hip osteoarthritis. These are complex interventions whose effectiveness depends on one or more components that are often poorly identified. It has been suggested that health benefits may be greater with high-intensity rather than low-intensity exercise or physical activity.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of high- versus low-intensity physical activity or exercise programs in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; issue 06, 2014), MEDLINE (194 8 to June 2014) , EMBASE (198 0 to June 2014), CINAHL (1982 to June 2014), PEDro (1929 to June 2014), SCOPUS (to June 2014) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Registry Platform (to June 2014) for articles, without a language restriction. We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings, trials, and reference lists and contacted researchers and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of people with knee or hip osteoarthritis that compared high- versus low-intensity physical activity or exercise programs between the experimental and control group.High-intensity physical activity or exercise programs training had to refer to an increase in the overall amount of training time (frequency, duration, number of sessions) or the amount of work (strength, number of repetitions) or effort/energy expenditure (exertion, heart rate, effort).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted data on trial details. We contacted authors for additional information if necessary. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence for these outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included reports for six studies of 656 participants that compared high- and low-intensity exercise programs; five studies exclusively recruited people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (620 participants), and one study exclusively recruited people with hip or knee osteoarthritis (36 participants). The majority of the participants were females (70%). No studies evaluated physical activity programs. We found the overall quality of evidence to be low to very low due to concerns about study limitations and imprecision (small number of studies, large confidence intervals) for the major outcomes using the GRADE approach. Most of the studies had an unclear or high risk of bias for several domains, and we judged five of the six studies to be at high risk for performance, detection, and attrition bias.Low-quality evidence indicated reduced pain on a 20-point Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scale (mean difference (MD) -0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.63 to -0.04; 4% absolute reduction, 95% CI -8% to 0%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 11, 95% CI 14 to 22) and improved physical function on the 68-point WOMAC disability subscale (MD -2.65, 95% CI -5.29 to -0.01; 4% absolute reduction; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 13) immediately at the end of the exercise programs (from 8 to 24 weeks). However, these results are unlikely to be of clinical importance. These small improvements did not continue at longer-term follow-up (up to 40 weeks after the end of the intervention). We are uncertain of the effect on quality of life, as only one study reported this outcome (0 to 200 scale; MD 4.3, 95% CI -6.5 to 15.2; 2% absolute reduction; very low level of evidence).Our subgroup analyses provided uncertain evidence as to whether increased exercise time (duration, number of sessions) and level of resistance (strength or effort) have an impact on the exercise program effects.Three studies reported withdrawals due to adverse events. The number of dropouts was small. Only one study systematically monitored adverse effects, but four studies reported some adverse effects related to knee pain associated with an exercise program. We are uncertain as to whether high intensity increases the number of adverse effects (Peto odds ratio 1.72, 95% CI 0.51 to 5.81; - 2% absolute risk reduction; very low level of evidence). None of the included studies reported serious adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low-quality to low-quality evidence for no important clinical benefit of high-intensity compared to low-intensity exercise programs in improving pain and physical function in the short term. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of different types of intensity of exercise programs.We are uncertain as to whether higher-intensity exercise programs may induce more harmful effects than those of lower intensity; this must be evaluated by further studies. Withdrawals due to adverse events were poorly monitored and not reported systematically in each group. We downgraded the evidence to low or very low because of the risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision.The small number of studies comparing high- and low-intensity exercise programs in osteoarthritis underscores the need for more studies investigating the dose-response relationship in exercise programs. In particular, further studies are needed to establish the minimal intensity of exercise programs needed for clinical effect and the highest intensity patients can tolerate. Larger studies should comply with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist and systematically report harms data to evaluate the potential impact of highest intensities of exercise programs in people with joint damage.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major public health issue because it causes chronic pain, reduces physical function and diminishes quality of life. Ageing of the population and increased global prevalence of obesity are anticipated to dramatically increase the prevalence of knee OA and its associated impairments. No cure for knee OA is known, but exercise therapy is among the dominant non-pharmacological interventions recommended by international guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched, up until May 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) randomly assigning individuals and comparing groups treated with some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercise conducted in the water) with a non-exercise group or a non-treatment control group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three teams of two review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each study and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. We conducted analyses on continuous outcomes (pain, physical function and quality of life) immediately after treatment and on dichotomous outcomes (proportion of study withdrawals) at the end of the study; we also conducted analyses on the sustained effects of exercise on pain and function (two to six months, and longer than six months).

MAIN RESULTS

In total, we extracted data from 54 studies. Overall, 19 (20%) studies reported adequate random sequence generation and allocation concealment and adequately accounted for incomplete outcome data; we considered these studies to have an overall low risk of bias. Studies were largely free from selection bias, but research results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias, as only four of the RCTs reported blinding of participants to treatment allocation, and, although most RCTs reported blinded outcome assessment, pain, physical function and quality of life were participant self-reported.High-quality evidence from 44 trials (3537 participants) indicates that exercise reduced pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to -0.59) immediately after treatment. Pain was estimated at 44 points on a 0 to 100-point scale (0 indicated no pain) in the control group; exercise reduced pain by an equivalent of 12 points (95% CI 10 to 15 points). Moderate-quality evidence from 44 trials (3913 participants) showed that exercise improved physical function (SMD -0.52, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.64) immediately after treatment. Physical function was estimated at 38 points on a 0 to 100-point scale (0 indicated no loss of physical function) in the control group; exercise improved physical function by an equivalent of 10 points (95% CI 8 to 13 points). High-quality evidence from 13 studies (1073 participants) revealed that exercise improved quality of life (SMD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.40) immediately after treatment. Quality of life was estimated at 43 points on a 0 to 100-point scale (100 indicated best quality of life) in the control group; exercise improved quality of life by an equivalent of 4 points (95% CI 2 to 5 points).High-quality evidence from 45 studies (4607 participants) showed a comparable likelihood of withdrawal from exercise allocation (event rate 14%) compared with the control group (event rate 15%), and this difference was not significant: odds ratio (OR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.15). Eight studies reported adverse events, all of which were related to increased knee or low back pain attributed to the exercise intervention provided. No study reported a serious adverse event.In addition, 12 included studies provided two to six-month post-treatment sustainability data on 1468 participants for knee pain and on 1279 (10 studies) participants for physical function. These studies indicated sustainability of treatment effect for pain (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.14), with an equivalent reduction of 6 (3 to 9) points on 0 to 100-point scale, and of physical function (SMD -0.15 95% CI -0.26 to -0.04), with an equivalent improvement of 3 (1 to 5) points on 0 to 100-point scale.Marked variability was noted across included studies among participants recruited, symptom duration, exercise interventions assessed and important aspects of study methodology. Individually delivered programmes tended to result in greater reductions in pain and improvements in physical function, compared to class-based exercise programmes or home-based programmes; however between-study heterogeneity was marked within the individually provided treatment delivery subgroup.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence indicates that land-based therapeutic exercise provides short-term benefit that is sustained for at least two to six months after cessation of formal treatment in terms of reduced knee pain, and moderate-quality evidence shows improvement in physical function among people with knee OA. The magnitude of the treatment effect would be considered moderate (immediate) to small (two to six months) but comparable with estimates reported for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Confidence intervals around demonstrated pooled results for pain reduction and improvement in physical function do not exclude a minimal clinically important treatment effect. Since the participants in most trials were aware of their treatment, this may have contributed to their improvement. Despite the lack of blinding we did not downgrade the quality of evidence for risk of performance or detection bias. This reflects our belief that further research in this area is unlikely to change the findings of our review.

A systematic review of studies using pedometers as an intervention for musculoskeletal diseases

Background

Physical activity (PA) plays an important role in the prevention and management of a number of chronic conditions. Aim: to investigate the evidence for effectiveness of pedometer-driven walking programs to promote physical activity among patients with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).

Method

A comprehensive systematic review was performed using 11 electronic databases up to 20 February 2014. Keywords and MeSH terms included “musculoskeletal disorders”, “walking”, and “pedometer”. Randomized controlled trials, published in English, that examined the effects of a pedometer-based walking intervention to increase physical activity levels and improve physical function and pain in patients with musculoskeletal disorders were included.

Result

Of the 1996 articles retrieved, seven studies ranging in date of publication from 1998 to 2013 met the inclusion criteria, allowing data extraction on 484 participants with an age range of 40 to 82 years. Interventions lasted from 4 weeks to 12 months and the results across studies showed significant increases in step count (p < 0.05) following the intervention. Across these studies, there was a mean increase in PA of 1950 steps per day relative to baseline. Four studies reported improved scores for pain and/or physical function at the intervention completion point relative to controls.

Conclusion

This study provides strong evidence for the effectiveness of pedometer walking interventions in increasing PA levels for patients with MSDs. Our findings suggest that a combination of interventions is likely to be the most effective strategy to maximize health benefits in the short term. Further research should include larger sample sizes, and longer intervention durations are required to support the role of pedometer walking interventions as a long term intervention for management of musculoskeletal disorders.

Use of pedometer-driven walking to promote physical activity and improve health-related quality of life among meat processing workers: a feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Current evidence supports the use of pedometers as effective motivational tools to promote physical activity and improve health-related quality of life in the general population. The aims of this study are to examine whether a pedometer-driven walking programme can improve health-related quality of life, and increase ambulatory activity in a population of meat processing workers when compared to a control group receiving educational material alone.

METHODS/DESIGN

A feasibility study employing a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design will collect data at three time points. A sample of up to 60 meat workers will be recruited and randomly assigned to either an intervention group N = 30 (12-week pedometer-driven walking program, brief intervention, and educational material), or control group N = 30 (educational material only). The primary outcomes of ambulatory activity, health-related quality of life, and functional capacity, will be evaluated at baseline, immediately following the 12-week intervention and then at three month post-intervention.

DISCUSSION

This paper describes the design of a feasibility randomized controlled trial, which aims to assess the effectiveness of the introduction of a workplace pedometer-driven walking program compared to normal lifestyle advice in meat processing workers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER (ANZCTR)

12613000087752.

Efficacies of different preparations of glucosamine for the treatment of osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacies of different preparations of glucosamine for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Systematic searches of the bibliographic databases Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) concerning glucosamine treatment of OA. Effect size (ES) was estimated using Cohen's standardised mean difference. Consistency was evaluated via the I(2) index.

RESULTS

Nineteen trials (3159 patients) contributed to the meta-analysis, revealing a large degree of inconsistency among the trials in terms of pain-reduction outcome: the combined ES in glucosamine sulphate (GS) trials was -0.22 [95% confidence intervals (CI) -0.48, 0.04], I(2) was 82.3%. The combined ES in glucosamine hydrochloride (GH) trials was -0.03 (95% CI -0.14, 0.08), with an absence of heterogeneity. No treatment ES was observed [-0.38 (95% CI -0.99, 0.23)] favouring GS in trials of less than 24 weeks duration and the I(2) remained high (I(2) = 88.5%). No significant treatment ES -0.09 (95% CI -0.21, 0.03) was observed in trials of more than 24 weeks duration compared with placebo, with a heterogeneity of zero. In terms of function-modifying outcomes, GS showed no significant effect on Lequesne Index reduction vs. placebo in trials of less than 24 weeks duration (ES -0.55 (95% CI -1.22, 0.11)) with a high degree of heterogeneity (I(2) = 92.9%). Pooling data from studies with durations of more than 24 weeks presented a significant combined ES of -0.36 (95% CI: -0.56, -0.17) with an absence of heterogeneity. No risk of publication bias could be detected using Egger test.

CONCLUSIONS

GH is ineffective for pain reduction in patients with knee OA. GS may have function-modifying effects in patients with knee OA when administered for more than 6 months. However, it showed no pain-reduction benefits after 6 months of therapy.

The effects of a moderate exercise program on knee osteoarthritis in male wistar rats

OBJECTIVE(S)

Osteoarthritis (OA) or degenerative joint disease is the commonest form of arthritis and can lead to joint pain, decrease in joint's range of motion, loss of function, and ultimately disability. Exercise is considered as one of the non-pharmacological treatments of OA. But the effects of exercise on knee joint cartilage remain ambiguous. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of a four-week moderate treadmill exercise on rats' knee osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighteen male Wistar rats (173 ± 1 g, 8 weeks old) were randomly divided into three groups (n = 6): Intact control, monosodium iodoacetate (MIA) only (OA), and training. The osteoarthritis model was induced by intra-articular injection of monosodium iodoacetate (MIA). Subjects followed a moderate-intensity exercise program for 28 days. Rats were killed after 28 days and histological assessment was done on their knee joints. One-way ANOVA (P<0.05) and post-hoc Tukey test was used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Histological assessment on 3 measurements of, depth ratio of lesions (P=0.001), total cartilage degeneration width (P=0.001), and significant cartilage degeneration width (P=0.001), demonstrated that moderate exercise for 4 weeks could surprisingly almost treat OA symptoms of rats' knee joints.

CONCLUSION

The findings of the present study indicate that a moderate treadmill exercise program exert a beneficial influence on rats' knee osteoarthritis.

Addition of telephone coaching to a physiotherapist-delivered physical activity program in people with knee osteoarthritis: a randomised controlled trial protocol

Background

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and costly chronic musculoskeletal conditions world-wide and is associated with substantial pain and disability. Many people with knee OA also experience co-morbidities that further add to the OA burden. Uptake of and adherence to physical activity recommendations is suboptimal in this patient population, leading to poorer OA outcomes and greater impact of associated co-morbidities. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will investigate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of adding telephone coaching to a physiotherapist-delivered physical activity intervention for people with knee OA.

Methods/Design

168 people with clinically diagnosed knee OA will be recruited from the community in metropolitan and regional areas and randomly allocated to physiotherapy only, or physiotherapy plus nurse-delivered telephone coaching. Physiotherapy involves five treatment sessions over 6 months, incorporating a home exercise program of 4–6 exercises (targeting knee extensor and hip abductor strength) and advice to increase daily physical activity. Telephone coaching comprises 6–12 telephone calls over 6 months by health practitioners trained in applying the Health Change Australia (HCA) Model of Health Change to provide behaviour change support. The telephone coaching intervention aims to maximise adherence to the physiotherapy program, as well as facilitate increased levels of participation in general physical activity. The primary outcomes are pain measured by an 11-point numeric rating scale and self-reported physical function measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index subscale after 6 months. Secondary outcomes include physical activity levels, quality-of-life, and potential moderators and mediators of outcomes including self-efficacy, pain coping and depression. Relative cost-effectiveness will be determined from health service usage and outcome data. Follow-up assessments will also occur at 12 and 18 months.

Discussion

The findings will help determine whether the addition of telephone coaching sessions can improve sustainability of outcomes from a physiotherapist-delivered physical activity intervention in people with knee OA.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN12612000308897

Validity of the step test for exercise prescription: no extension to a larger age range

The purpose of this study was to determine the validity of a submaximal exercise test, the Step Test Exercise Prescription (STEP), in a broad age range and in individuals in the earliest stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Individuals (n = 102) underwent treadmill-based maximal exercise testing and a STEP. The STEP failed to predict peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak), and was a biased estimate of VO2peak (p < .0001). Only 43% of subjects' STEP results were within 3.5 ml · kg-1 · min-1 of VO2peak. When categorized into fitness levels these 2 measures demonstrated moderate agreement (kappa = .59). The validity of the STEP was not supported in our participants, including those with AD. The STEP may not be appropriate in the clinic as a basis for exercise recommendations in these groups, although it may continue to have utility in classifying fitness in research or community health screenings.

Effects of diet type and supplementation of glucosamine, chondroitin, and MSM on body composition, functional status, and markers of health in women with knee osteoarthritis initiating a resistance-based exercise and weight loss program

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine whether sedentary obese women with knee OA initiating an exercise and weight loss program may experience more beneficial changes in body composition, functional capacity, and/or markers of health following a higher protein diet compared to a higher carbohydrate diet with or without GCM supplementation.

METHODS

Thirty sedentary women (54 ± 9 yrs, 163 ± 6 cm, 88.6 ± 13 kg, 46.1 ± 3% fat, 33.3 ± 5 kg/m2) with clinically diagnosed knee OA participated in a 14-week exercise and weight loss program. Participants followed an isoenergenic low fat higher carbohydrate (HC) or higher protein (HP) diet while participating in a supervised 30-minute circuit resistance-training program three times per week for 14-weeks. In a randomized and double blind manner, participants ingested supplements containing 1,500 mg/d of glucosamine (as d-glucosamine HCL), 1,200 mg/d of chondroitin sulfate (from chondroitin sulfate sodium), and 900 mg/d of methylsulfonylmethane or a placebo. At 0, 10, and 14-weeks, participants completed a battery of assessments. Data were analyzed by MANOVA with repeated measures.

RESULTS

Participants in both groups experienced significant reductions in body mass (-2.4 ± 3%), fat mass (-6.0 ± 6%), and body fat (-3.5 ± 4%) with no significant changes in fat free mass or resting energy expenditure. Perception of knee pain (-49 ± 39%) and knee stiffness (-42 ± 37%) was decreased while maximal strength (12%), muscular endurance (20%), balance indices (7% to 20%), lipid levels (-8% to -12%), homeostasis model assessment for estimating insulin resistance (-17%), leptin (-30%), and measures of physical functioning (59%), vitality (120%), and social function (66%) were improved in both groups with no differences among groups. Functional aerobic capacity was increased to a greater degree for those in the HP and GCM groups while there were some trends suggesting that supplementation affected perceptions of knee pain (p < 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Circuit style resistance-training and weight loss improved functional capacity in women with knee OA. The type of diet and dietary supplementation of GCM provided marginal additive benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01271218.

Osteoarthritis year 2010 in review: non-pharmacologic therapy

OBJECTIVE

To highlight seminal publications in the past year on the topic of non-pharmacologic management of osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

A systematic search of the PUBMED and Cochrane databases from September 2009 to September 2010 was conducted to identify articles reporting on studies examining the safety or efficacy of non-pharmacologic therapies in the management of OA. Non-pharmacologic therapies were those considered in the 2008 OARSI OA guidelines. Identified articles were reviewed for quality; those of highest quality and deemed to have greatest potential impact on the management of OA were summarized.

RESULTS

The search identified 117 unique articles. Of these, four studies were chosen to highlight. A nested two-stage trial found that traditional Chinese acupuncture (TCA) was not superior to sham acupuncture, but that the providers' style affected both pain reduction and satisfaction with treatment, suggesting that the analgesic benefits of acupuncture may be partially mediated by the acupuncturists' behavior. A systematic review found little evidence of a significant effect for electrostimulation vs sham or no intervention on pain in knee OA. A single-blinded trial of Tai Chi vs attention controls found that 12 weeks of Tai Chi was associated with improvements in symptoms and disability in patients with knee OA. A randomized trial of early ACL reconstructive surgery and rehabilitation vs structured rehabilitation alone in subjects with acute anterior cruciate ligament tears found that, at 24 months following randomization, all study participants had improved, suggesting that a strategy of structured rehabilitation followed acute ACL injury may preclude the need for surgical reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

High quality studies of the safety and efficacy of non-pharmacologic agents in the management of OA remain challenging due to difficulties with adequate blinding and appropriate selection of attention controls. High quality studies suggest modest, if any, benefit of many non-pharmacologic therapies over attention control or placebo, but a significant impact of both over no intervention at all.