Effects of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching in relieving pain and balancing knee loading during stepping over obstacles among older adults with knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial

Isokinetic muscle strength training combined with proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation for rehabilitation of patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Anterior cruciate ligament injury seriously affects the motor function of patients. Currently, there are numerous rehabilitation methods after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The aim of this study was to investigate the rehabilitation effect of isokinetic muscle strength training combined with proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) technique in postoperative patients. A single-blind randomised controlled trial was conducted to compare the difference between this combined therapy and conventional rehabilitation, and to provide a scientific basis for optimising the rehabilitation strategy after ACLR, to promote faster and better recovery of knee joint function in patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a randomised controlled, assessor-blind trial. A total of 40 patients after ACLR were randomly divided into a control group and a test group. Conventional rehabilitation and isokinetic muscle strength training will be performed in the control group, while the test group will receive PNF techniques in addition to the interventions of the control group. These interventions were performed three times a week for 6 weeks. All interventions will be completed in the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University. The primary outcome measure will be assessed by knee proprioception. Secondary outcome measures will include knee isokinetic strength, balance ability and Lysholm knee function score. The above assessments will include a baseline assessment, an assessment after 6 weeks of intervention, and a follow-up visit at week 24.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (Number: 2024059). Study results will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals and may be shared at relevant meetings and research meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2400085897.

Effects of stretching exercise on walking performance and balance in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review aimed to analyse the literature on the effects of stretching exercise as a strategy to improve walking performance and balance in older adults. A literature search was performed in five databases up to October 2023 for randomized clinical trials addressing the effects of stretching exercise programs in older adults. The methodological quality was evaluated through the PEDro scale. A total of 29 studies were included. Methodological quality was good in 16 publications and fair in 13 investigations. Improvements on balance and walking ability following stretching programs were reported in different studies. The meta-analysis pooling 139 participants from 6 studies showed that stretching interventions increased gait speed in comparison with control groups that were not assigned to any exercise programs (standardized mean difference=0.56; 95 % confidence interval: 0.21, 0.90; I-squared = 0 %, p=0.520). These findings indicate potential benefits of stretching exercises to enhance walking ability in older adult population.

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.

Comparison of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization and proprioceptive neuromuscular stretching on hamstring flexibility in patients with knee osteoarthritis

Background

The association between hamstring tightness and knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is significant because tight hamstrings can put more strain on the knee joint, reduce its range of motion, and cause compensatory movements that worsen the KOA.

Objective

To compare the effects of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) and proprioceptive neuromuscular (PNF) on hamstring flexibility in patients with KOA.

Methods

Data for the randomized controlled trial (NCT05110326) was collected from n = 60 participants randomly divided into group A received IASTM and group B received PNF stretching. In group A, the therapist made 30 strokes gentle strokes with the tool from the origin to the insertion while holding the plane at a 45-degree angle over the treatment area. In group B, PNF stretching was done with three repetitions and 10 seconds rest between each, after isometric contraction of the hamstring muscle using approximately 50% of their maximum strength, holding it for 8 seconds, and then releasing it. A 30-minute session was given to each patient three times per week and was given for 6 weeks. Outcome measures were the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain intensity, the active knee extension test (AKET) for hamstring flexibility, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) for the health status of KOA patients.

Results

The study found a significant interaction (p < 0.001) between interventions and time across several measurements. After 6 weeks, both interventions resulted in significant improvements (p < 0.001) across all dependent variables, with group A (IASTM) showing more significant improvement in hamstring flexibility, pain reduction, and health status (p < 0.001) compared to group B (PNF).

Conclusions

Both the IASTM technique and PNF stretching resulted in increased hamstring flexibility, decreased pain, and enhanced general health. The IASTM technique, however, showed potential benefits over PNF stretching in terms of flexibility, pain relief, and public health enhancement. Physical therapists and manual therapists may prioritize the usage of the IASTM technique for patients who want to make significant changes in these areas.

Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation after Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Elderly with Knee, Hip, Shoulder, and Temporomandibular Joint Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent degenerative joint condition characterized by cartilage deterioration, joint inflammation, and functional limitations, particularly impacting the elderly population. Rehabilitation and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections are common therapeutic approaches routinely used in clinical practice, but their synergistic potential is far from being fully characterized. Thus, the aim of this narrative review was to elucidate the multilevel benefits and synergies of integrating these two approaches in multidisciplinary OA rehabilitation. This narrative review follows the scale for the assessment of narrative review articles (SANRA) criteria and involves a comprehensive literature search from July to August 2023. Two independent reviewers screened studies, including those involving human subjects with OA, rehabilitation strategies, and outcomes following HA injection, published in English. Results: HA injections might improve joint biomechanics, reducing friction, absorbing shocks, and potentially regulating inflammation. Rehabilitation plays a pivotal role in strengthening muscles, increasing the range of motion, and enhancing overall function. Optimizing rehabilitation following HA injection might provide additional benefits in joint health. OA management requires a multidisciplinary approach integrating HA injections, rehabilitation, and personalized care. Challenges in patient adherence and healthcare resources currently exist, but emerging technologies offer opportunities to enhance patient engagement and monitoring optimizing sustainability and outcomes of patients with knee, hip, shoulder, and temporomandibular joint OA.