Effect of a stabilization exercise program versus standard treatment for thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: A randomized trial

What Are the Most Clinically Effective Nonoperative Interventions for Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis? An Up-to-date Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC-1 OA) is a common and debilitating condition, particularly among older adults and women. With the aging population, the prevalence of CMC-1 OA is expected to rise, emphasizing the need to find effective nonoperative strategies. So far, for determining the most effective nonoperative interventions in CMC-1 OA, two network meta-analyses (NMAs) have been published. However, these NMAs were limited to specific intervention types: one comparing multiple splints and the other comparing different intraarticular injections. Therefore, an NMA that compared all nonoperative intervention types is urgently needed.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

This study aimed to assess and compare the effectiveness of available nonoperative interventions (both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic) for CMC-1 OA to establish which nonoperative options are more effective than control in terms of (1) pain, (2) function, and (3) grip strength.

METHODS

We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) NMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD2021272247) and conducted a comprehensive search across Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL up to March 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating nonoperative interventions for symptomatic CMC-1 OA, excluding inflammatory or posttraumatic arthritis. Studies comparing ≥ 2 interventions or against a control, focusing on pain reduction, functional improvement, and grip strength, were selected. We assessed methodologic quality using the modified Coleman Methodology Score, including only studies scoring > 70. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, and evidence quality with Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). Of 29 screened studies, 22 (21 RCTs and one quasi-RCT) were included, involving 1631 women and 331 men. We analyzed eight different nonoperative interventions, including splints, hand exercises, injections, and multimodal treatment (≥ 2 nonpharmacologic interventions or nonpharmacologic with a pharmacologic intervention). Six studies had a low risk of bias, eight had a high risk, and the remainder were moderate. We extracted mean and SD scores, and NMA and pairwise analyses were performed at short- (≤ 3 months) and medium-term (> 3 to ≤ 12 months) time points. Standardized mean differences were re-expressed into common units for interpretation, which were the VAS (range 0 to 10) for pain, the DASH test (range to 100) for function, and pounds for grip strength. Clinical recommendations were considered strong if the mean differences exceeded the minimum clinically important difference-1.4 points for VAS, 10 points for DASH, and 14 pounds for grip strength-and were supported by moderate or high confidence in the evidence, as assessed using CINeMA methodology.

RESULTS

Our NMA (based on moderate or high confidence) showed a clinically important reduction in pain at the short-term time point for multimodal treatment and hand exercises versus control (mean difference VAS score -5.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) -7.6 to -3.0] and -5.0 [95% CI -8.5 to -1.5]). At the medium-term time point, only the rigid carpometacarpal-metacarpophalangeal (CMC-MCP) splint was superior to control (mean difference VAS score -1.9 [95% CI -3.1 to -0.6]) and demonstrated clinical importance. For function, only the rigid CMC-MCP splint demonstrated a clinically important improvement at the medium-term time point versus control (mean difference DASH score -11 [95% CI -21 to -1]). Hand exercises resulted in a clinically important improvement in short-term grip strength versus control (mean difference 21 pounds [95% CI 11 to 31]).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and NMA show that multimodal treatment and hand exercises reduce short-term pain and improve grip strength, while a rigid CMC-MCP splint enhances medium-term function. Future research should evaluate long-term efficacy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

Efficacy and safety of non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical treatments for hand osteoarthritis in 2024: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

We aimed to update the 2018 systematic literature review on the efficacy and safety of treatments for hand osteoarthritis (OA), which was based on 126 studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search on randomised controlled trials from June 2017 up to 31 December 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool. Meta-analyses of previous and new studies regarding the efficacy for pain, function, grip strength and OMERACT/OARSI responders were performed. Certainty of evidence was judged using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tool.

RESULTS

Sixty-five new studies were included. For non-pharmacological interventions, there was low-certainty evidence for a small long-term effect of hand exercises and a moderate long-term effect of thumb orthoses for pain, and moderate-certainty evidence that assistive devices had a moderate long-term effect on function. Concerning pharmacological interventions, there was low-certainty evidence for a moderate short-term effect of oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on pain, high- and moderate-certainty evidence for a small short-term effect of topical NSAIDs and oral glucocorticoids on function, respectively, and low-certainty evidence that oral glucocorticoids had a small short-term effect on function. Further, there was low-certainty evidence that methotrexate had a small long-term effect on pain. The heterogeneity of studies did not allow for any meta-analyses on surgery.

CONCLUSION

The results largely support current treatment recommendations. However, there is a lack of interventions that efficiently improve grip strength, and the evidence for most current treatments is still limited. To better understand action mechanism of different treatments, future trials should include hand OA subtyping and be powered for subgroup analyses.

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) vs. Exercise in Thumb Osteoarthritis (SWEX-TO): Prospective Clinical Trial at 6 Months

Rhizarthrosis is the most frequent form of osteoarthritis and is responsible for pain, disability and reduced functionality. The aim of the study is to investigate the clinical effects of shock wave treatment in patients suffering from arthritis of the first finger. A prospective clinical study was designed, in which 72 patients affected by rhizarthrosis were randomized to treatment with shock waves or exercises; in both groups an immobilization brace was used on the first finger. At recruitment and at 1, 3 and 6 months, patients received assessments of pain (VAS), functionality (FIHOA) and disability (DASH); furthermore, the perception of improvement was monitored during follow-ups (Roles and Maudsley Score). In both groups there was a significant improvement in all scores in the comparison between recruitment and 6 months. The perception of improvement was statistically better in the shock wave group than in the exercise group at 1, 3 and 6 months. The regression analysis showed that the reduction of VAS and DASH were statistically influenced by shock wave treatment (p < 0.001). Both therapies are effective in managing patients suffering from arthritis of the first finger, but the shock wave treatment could ensure greater persistence of improvements.

Osteoarthritis Year In Review 2024: Rehabilitation and outcomes

This Year in Review presents key highlights from recent research relating to osteoarthritis rehabilitation and its outcomes, defined as any non-pharmacological and non-surgical treatment that aims to improve osteoarthritis symptoms at any joint. Three databases (Medline, Embase, and CINAHL Plus) were searched between 1 March 2023 to 12 March 2024. Relevant studies were chosen based on the predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, perceived clinical importance, quality, controversy in the field, or personal interest, and organised into four overarching themes (with 1-5 sub-themes each). The first theme related to uncertainties regarding exercise benefits. New work has challenged the clinical effectiveness of exercise on symptoms, as well as highlighted uncertainty around our understanding of both mechanisms of effects, how to enhance effectiveness and adherence, and which subgroups of people are more or less likely to improve with exercise. However, we also highlight new work confirming the role of exercise as a first-line management strategy. The second theme related to digital modes of service delivery. There was new evidence to support its effectiveness in improving symptoms and clear potential for creating and evaluating new mobile apps. New work also highlighted the potential future role artificial intelligence can have in providing treatment information and recommendations. The third theme related to patient education, and the call for change to the impairment-based narrative that prevails in osteoarthritis information. The fourth theme is related to weight loss. New work compared the effectiveness of different weight loss diets and explored alternative models of weight loss delivery.

Exercise-Based Interventions Are Effective in the Management of Patients with Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Exercise-based interventions are a common management strategy in patients with thumb carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis (CMCJ OA); however, their exact effect on or the use of an optimal training programme for reducing pain and disability remains unclear. Our purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of exercise-based interventions compared with other conservative interventions in patients with CMCJ OA. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Fourteen randomised clinical trials with 1280 patients were finally included. Exercise-based interventions present statistically and clinically better outcomes in reducing pain intensity (mean difference [MD]: -21.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -36.59, -7.24; p = 0.003) and wrist disability (MD: -8.1, 95% CI: -4.6, -11.5; p = 0.02) compared with no treatment at short-term follow-up. Proprioceptive exercises have statistically and clinically better outcomes compared with standard care only in pain intensity at very short-term (standardised mean difference [SMD]: -0.76; 95% CI: -1.30, -0.21; p = 0.007) and short-term (SMD: -0.93; 95% CI: -1.86, -0.01; p = 0.049) follow-up and statistically better results in wrist disability at very short-term (SMD: -0.94; 95% CI: -1.68, -0.21; p = 0.01) follow-up. No differences were found between the comparators at mid- and long-term follow-up. Low to moderate certainty of evidence suggests that exercise-based interventions can provide clinically better outcomes compared with no treatment in patients with thumb CMCJ OA, at least in the short term.

Effects of a neuromuscular joint-protective exercise therapy program for treatment of wrist osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Individuals with wrist osteoarthritis (OA) can suffer from pain, muscular weakness, and impaired motion of the wrist, which can reduce the quality of life. While there is strong evidence that all patients with OA should receive first-line treatment with education and exercises, this approach has not yet been proposed for individuals with wrist OA. Therefore, this trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a first line neuromuscular joint-protective exercise therapy program compared to a training program with range of motion (ROM) exercises in patients with wrist OA.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), 48 patients with symptomatic and radiographically confirmed wrist OA were randomly allocated to a 12-week self-management program with either a neuromuscular joint-protective exercise therapy program (intervention group) or a training program with ROM exercises only (control group). Our primary outcome measure was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) with secondary outcome measures of grip strength, range of wrist motion, the Numerical Pain Rating, Scale (NPRS), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) and the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES). The outcome measures were evaluated by a blinded assessor at baseline and 12 weeks. Between-groups differences were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test and within-group differences were analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 41 participants were analyzed at 12 weeks. There were no significant differences in PRWE between the groups at 12 weeks (p = 0.27). However, DASH improved significantly in the intervention group compared to the control group (p = 0.02) and NPRS on load within the intervention group (p = 0.006). The difference in DASH should be interpreted with caution since it could be due to a non-significant increase (worsening) from baseline in the control group in combination with a non-significant decrease (improvement) in the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS

This RCT showed that the novel neuromuscular joint-protective exercise therapy program was not superior in reducing pain and improving function compared to a training program with ROM exercises at 12 weeks. Future research is warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of forthcoming exercise therapy treatment programs for patients with wrist OA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05367817. Retrospectively registered on 10/05/2022. https://clinicaltrials.gov .