Influence of a periodized circuit training protocol on intermuscular adipose tissue of patients with knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Face-to-face and telerehabilitation delivery of circuit training have similar benefits and acceptability in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomised trial

QUESTION

Is periodised circuit training delivered via a telerehabilitation model of care as effective as the same training applied face-to-face for improving pain intensity, physical function, muscle strength, pain catastrophising, body composition, intermuscular adipose tissue and muscle architecture in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA)?

DESIGN

Randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessors and intention-to-treat analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred adults aged ≥ 40 years with knee OA and pain for ≥ 3 months, with current pain ≥ 40 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS).

INTERVENTION

The experimental group received 14 weeks of circuit training delivered via telerehabilitation using video recordings, followed by periodic phone calls in order to motivate and instruct participants. The control group received the same circuit training program in a face-to-face format.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were pain VAS and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical function subscale, measured at 14 weeks. Secondary outcomes included objective physical function, strength, pain catastrophising and morphological measures (muscle architecture and thigh and body composition). Outcomes were measured at 14 and 26 weeks.

RESULTS

Periodised circuit training delivered via telerehabilitation had equivalent effects to face-to-face delivery for pain intensity, physical function, muscle strength, pain catastrophising, thigh composition, intermuscular adipose tissue and muscle architecture. Whole body composition did not change appreciably in either group. Adherence to the training was excellent and participants in each group reported good perceptions of their randomised intervention.

CONCLUSION

A periodised circuit training protocol can be delivered to people with knee OA in their own homes, using available technology while maintaining high levels of acceptability. More importantly, telerehabilitation appears to cause non-inferior physical and functional outcomes to face-to-face rehabilitation programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

RBR-662hn2.

Effects of Circuit Training on Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The most prevalent joint disease is osteoarthritis (OA), which affects an estimated 240 million individuals worldwide. Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is one of the top 10 causes of disability worldwide. The aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the effect of circuit training (CT) on patients with KOA. We searched through PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, and Google Scholar up to 12 February 2022. We used random-effects statistical analysis for continuous variables and reported the results as a standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95 percent confidence intervals (CI). Seven trials involving 346 patients were included. A significant improvement in the intervention group was observed for the parameter, pain level (SMD -0.96, 95% CI -1.77 to -0.14; p = 0.02; seven trials, 346 participants; high quality evidence), while no significant improvement was found in physical function (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.44-0.50; p = 0.89; five trials, 294 participants; high-quality evidence), quality of life (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -1.18-0.68; p = 0.60; three trials, 205 participants; high-quality evidence), the activity of daily living (SMD 0.81, 95% CI -0.85-2.48; p = 0.34; three trials, 223 participants; high-quality evidence), and knee stiffness (SMD -0.65, 95% CI -1.96-0.66; p = 0.33; two trials, 71 participants; high-quality evidence). The findings in this meta-analysis suggest that CT could effectively complement the conventional treatment of KOA, particularly in alleviating pain. However, comprehensive data on the guidelines for the CT approach would be needed to adequately examine the effects of CT on quality of life and biochemical markers in patients with KOA.

Effects of a periodized circuit training protocol delivered by telerehabilitation compared to face-to-face method for knee osteoarthritis: a protocol for a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Regular exercise is an effective method for reducing pain and disability in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), as well as improving body composition. Thus, a combination of both resistance and aerobic training (circuit training) has shown to be promising for this population. However, access to physical therapy is limited by physical distance, social isolation, and/or treatment costs. Remote rehabilitation seems to be an effective way to minimize these barriers, but the benefits are dependent on the participants' adherence to the interventions provided at a distance. The objectives of this protocol are to compare the effects of a periodized circuit training applied via telerehabilitation with the same protocol applied in the face-to-face model for individuals with knee OA.

METHODS

This study presents a single-blinded protocol for a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial. One hundred participants diagnosed with knee OA (grades II and III Kellgren and Lawrence system), aged 40 years or more, and BMI < 30 kg/m2 will be randomly divided into two groups: telerehabilitation (TR) and face-to-face (FtF) circuit training. The FtF group will perform a 14-week periodized circuit training protocol supervised by a physical therapist, 3 times a week. The TR group will perform the same exercise protocol at home, at least 3 times a week. In addition, the TR group will be able to follow the execution and orientations of the exercises by DVD, a website, and online file sharing tools, and they will receive periodic phone calls in order to motivate, clarify, and inform some aspects of knee OA. The primary outcomes are changes in self-reported pain intensity (visual analog scale (VAS)) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)), with a primary end-point of 14 weeks and a secondary end-point of 26 weeks. Secondary outcomes include changes in other clinical outcomes, in morphological characteristics, adherence, acceptability, and treatment perspective.

DISCUSSION

A circuit training through telerehabilitation may contribute to developing early intervention in the causative and potentiating factors of the knee OA, verifying the effects of a low-cost, non-pharmacological and non-invasive treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) ID: RBR-662hn2. Registered on 31 March 2019. Link: http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br ; Universal Trial Number (UTN) of World Health Organization: U1111-1230-9517.

Is adiposity associated with back and lower limb pain? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Back and lower limb pain have a major impact on physical function and quality of life. While obesity is a modifiable risk factor for musculoskeletal pain, the role of adiposity is less clear. This systematic review aimed to examine the relationship between both adiposity and its distribution and back and lower limb pain.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify studies that examined the association between anthropometric and/or direct measures of adiposity and site specific musculoskeletal pain. Risk of bias was assessed and a best evidence synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 56 studies were identified which examined 4 pain regions, including the lower back (36 studies), hip (two studies), knee (13 studies) and foot (eight studies). 31(55%) studies were assessed as having low to moderate risk of bias. 17(30%) studies were cohort in design. The best evidence synthesis provided evidence of a relationship between central adiposity and low back and knee pain, but not hip or foot pain. There was also evidence of a longitudinal relationship between adiposity and the presence of back, knee and foot pain, as well as incident and increasing foot pain.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides evidence of an association between both body fat and its central distribution and low back and knee pain, and a longitudinal relationship between adiposity and back, knee and foot pain. These results highlight the potential for targeting adiposity in the development of novel treatments at these sites.

Osteoarthritis Progression: Mitigation and Rehabilitation Strategies

Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis and is a substantial burden for patients with the disease. Currently, there is no cure for osteoarthritis, but many emerging therapies have been developed to aid in the mitigation of disease progression. When osteoarthritis reaches the end-stage of disease many patients undergo total joint arthroplasty to improve quality of life, yet some experience persistent pain and mobility limitations for extended periods following surgery. This review highlights recent therapeutic advancements in osteoarthritis treatment consisting of pharmacologics, nutraceuticals, biologics, and exercise while emphasizing the current state of post-arthroplasty rehabilitation.

Telerehabilitation for Knee Osteoarthritis in Brazil: A Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of telerehabilitation for a patient with knee osteoarthritis may depend upon the person's adherence to intervention. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate whether people with knee osteoarthritis would adhere to exercise-therapy facilitated via multiple media in Brazil, a newly industrialized country.

METHOD

This is a feasibility study, pre-post intervention. Middle aged (40-50 years) and elderly (≥70 years) people with knee osteoarthritis received in-person exercise-therapy instructions on the first day, along with a booklet and DVD (videos) to take home. Participants also received six motivational phone calls throughout the 12-week treatment. Satisfaction and adherence were assessed one week after intervention with the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS), sections B and C. Preference on the method used to adhere to exercises was recorded.

CONCLUSION

Telerehabilitation was well accepted by middle-aged and elderly Brazilians with knee osteoarthritis. The preferred media to enhance adherence, was a booklet with descriptions of the exercises, especially for the elderly cohort.

Lower education is an associated factor with the combination of pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia in patients with knee osteoarthritis?

OBJECTIVES

To analyze if socioeconomic characteristics as lower education and lower family income are associated factors with the combination of pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 140 participants aged 40 years or older with KOA grades II and III. Based on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), four groups were identified: non-catastrophic/non-kinesiophobic (NC/NK), non-catastrophic/non-kinesiophobic (NC/K), catastrophic/non-kinesiophobic (C/NK), and catastrophic/kinesiophobic (C/K). Pain intensity was measured using the visual analog scale (VAS). The 30-s chair stand test was performed to access physical function. Sociodemographic characteristics included age, sex, years of formal education (0 to 11 and > 11), and family income (up to 2 minimum wages and > 2). Multinomial regression analysis adjusted for age, radiographic severity, physical function, and pain intensity was used to determine the association between lower education and lower family income with the combination of pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia.

RESULTS

Only lower education was independently associated with the combination of pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia (OR = 3.96 CI 95% 1.01-15.51).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower education but not lower family income was an important associated factor with the combination of pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia in individuals with knee osteoarthritis. Thus, physician and physical therapist must pay attention on this important socioeconomic characteristic while conducting the treatment, since specific strategies of approach could be necessary for those patients. Key points • Lower education is an important associated factor with the combination of pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia in individuals with knee osteoarthritis. • Physician and physical therapist must pay attention on patients schooling while conducting the treatment.

Reductions of cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors after a 14-week periodized training model in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of a periodized circuit training (CT) compared with a conventional strength training (ST) and an educational protocol (EP) on body composition, metabolic parameters, muscle strength, pain, and physical performance in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHOD

This study followed a randomized controlled trial design. A sample of sixty-one patients with KOA, 40-65 years old and BMI < 30 kg/m², were randomly divided into three 14-week protocols: CT, ST, or EP. The CT performed whole body exercises organized in circuit, 3 times a week. The ST performed conventional resistance exercises also 3 times a week, and the EP joined in educational meetings twice a month. Body composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)); metabolic parameters (abdominal obesity, triglyceride, HDL, blood pressure and fasting glucose), knee maximal isometric voluntary contraction (MIVC) extension and flexion, performance-based tests (40-m walk test, 30-s chair test, and stair climb test), self-reported pain, stiffness, and physical function (WOMAC) and pain catastrophism were evaluated at baseline and follow-up. Repeated measures ANOVA were used to compare differences between groups (CTxSTxEP) at the different times of assessment (baseline × follow-up). When group-time interaction was found, a one-way ANOVA, followed by a Bonferroni post hoc test, was used to compare groups in each time point; while a paired t test was used to verify the time effect in each group. Additionally, the training effect was analyzed in terms of the percent change (Δ%). Effect size was calculated for post intervention (week 14) between groups. For all analyses a significance level of 5% was adopted (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The CT was the only protocol that presented significant lower body mass (p = 0.018; Δ% = - 1.4), fat mass (p = 0.017; Δ% = - 10.3), %fat mass (p < 0.001; Δ% = - 13.9), adipose indices (%fat trunk/%fat legs p = 0.031; Δ% = 7.8; fat mass/height² p = 0.011; Δ% = - 15.1; trunk/limb fat mass p = 0.012; Δ% = - 8.2; visceral adipose tissue (VAT) volume (cm³) p = 0.039; Δ% = - 11.6; VAT area (cm²) p = 0.044; Δ% = - 12.2), blood pressure levels (SBP p = 0.042; Δ% = - 3.4 and DBP p = 0.001; Δ% = - 4.9), higher lean mass and HDL (p < 0.001; Δ% = 5.9) compared to baseline. CT and ST presented lower WOMAC pain, stiffness and physical function (p < 0.001; Δ% = - 64.0 for CT and p < 0.001; Δ% = 0.001; Δ% = - 46.4 for ST in WOMAC total score, pain catastrophizing (p < 0.001; Δ% = - 66.7 for CT and p < 0.001; Δ% = - 61.5 for ST) a higher functional performance (30 s chair test: p < 0.001; Δ% = 45.7 for CT and p < 0.001; Δ% = 26.9 for ST; 40 m walk test: p < 0.001; Δ% = 26.7 for CT and p < 0.001; Δ% = 12.5 for ST; stair climb test: p = 0.002; Δ% = - 33.9 for CT and p < 0.001; Δ% = - 18.8 for ST) and knee extension MIVC (p < 0.001; Δ% = 21.92 for CT and p < 0.001; Δ% = 30.25 for ST).

CONCLUSION

A periodized CT model reduces visceral adipose tissue, SBP and DBP, and improves HDL, important cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors, in patients with KOA. Both trained groups (CT and ST) improve self-reported clinical symptoms, muscle strength, and physical performance in this sample.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02761590 (registered on May 4, 2016).

KEY POINTS

• A 14-week periodized circuit training reduces visceral adipose tissue, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and improves HDL blood levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis. • Both periodized circuit training and conventional strength training improve clinical symptoms, functional performance and muscle strength in this sample.