Effects of the WISH-type S-form Hip Brace on Muscle Strength in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Hip: A Short-term Longitudinal Study

Fundamentals of osteoarthritis. Rehabilitation: Exercise, diet, biomechanics, and physical therapist-delivered interventions

Insights related to the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis (OA) have informed rehabilitative treatments that aim to mitigate the influence of several known impairments and risk factors for OA, with the goal to improve pain, function, and quality of life. The purpose of this invited narrative review is to provide fundamental knowledge to non-specialists about exercise and education, diet, biomechanical interventions, and other physical therapist-delivered treatments. In addition to summarizing the rationale for common rehabilitative therapies, we provide a synthesis of current core recommendations. Robust evidence based on randomized clinical trials supports exercise with education and diet as core treatments for OA. Structured, supervised exercise therapy is advised. The mode of exercise may vary but should be individualized. The dose should be based on an initial assessment, the desired physiological changes, and progressed when appropriate. Diet combined with exercise is strongly recommended and studies demonstrate a dose-response relationship between the magnitude of weight loss and symptom improvement. Recent evidence suggests the use of technology to remotely deliver exercise, diet and education interventions is cost-effective. Although several studies support the mechanisms for biomechanical interventions (e.g., bracing, shoe inserts) and physical therapist-delivered (passive) treatments (e.g., manual therapy, electrotherapeutic modalities) fewer rigorous randomized trials support their clinical use; these therapies are sometimes recommended as adjuncts to core treatments. The mechanisms of action for all rehabilitative interventions include contextual factors such as attention and placebo effects. These effects can challenge our interpretation of treatment efficacy from clinical trials, yet also provide opportunities to maximize patient outcomes in clinical practice. When evaluating rehabilitative interventions, the field may benefit from increased emphasis on research that considers contextual factors while evaluating mechanistic, longer-term, clinically-important and policy-relevant outcome measures.

Possible Duration of WISH-type Hip Brace Use: Prognostic Value of Timed Up and Go Test

Objectives:

The WISH-type S-form hip brace (WISH brace) has significantly improved hip function and functional mobility in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). However, most patients later undergo surgery. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate how long the orthosis can be effectively used by patients with hip OA, and to reveal the associated prognostic factors.

Methods:

This prospective study examined the survival curve of the equipment by using surgery as an endpoint and investigated how the duration of use affects patients. Harris Hip Score, muscle strength, and the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) were evaluated as prognostic factors.

Results:

By drawing the survival curves of 26 patients, approximately one third were expected to be still using the brace after 7 years. A rapid decrease in use was observed at around 1 year. A significant difference between patients with and without bracing at 1 year was found for the TUG result with the unaffected leg inside (ULI) at the start of bracing. A cut-off value of 9.5 s for the TUG with ULI significantly differentiated patients with and without bracing at 1 year, suggesting a possible predictor of brace survivorship in the early phase.

Conclusions:

The TUG with ULI with a cut-off value of 9.5 s, or at most 10 s, may be a possible predictor of persistence of brace use in the early phase.