Total knee replacement plus physical and medical therapy or treatment with physical and medical therapy alone: a randomised controlled trial in patients with knee osteoarthritis (the MEDIC-study)

Comparing exercise and patient education with usual care in the treatment of hip dysplasia: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial with 6-month follow-up (MovetheHip trial)

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is not a viable treatment for all patients with hip dysplasia. Currently, usual care for these patients is limited to a consultation on self-management. We have shown that an exercise and patient education intervention is a feasible and acceptable intervention for patients not receiving surgery. Therefore, we aim to investigate whether patients with hip dysplasia randomised to exercise and patient education have a different mean change in self-reported pain compared with those randomised to usual care over 6 months. Furthermore, we aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and perform a process evaluation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In a randomised controlled trial, 200 young and middle-aged patients will be randomised to either exercise and patient education or usual care at a 1:1 ratio through permuted block randomisation. The intervention group will receive exercise instruction and patient education over 6 months. The usual care group will receive one consultation on self-management of hip symptoms. The primary outcome is the self-reported mean change in the pain subscale of the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). Secondary outcomes include mean changes in the other HAGOS subscales, in the Short Version of the International Hip Outcome Tool, in performance, balance and maximal hip muscle strength. Between-group comparison from baseline to 6-month follow-up will be made with intention-to-treat analyses with a mixed-effects model. Cost-effectiveness will be evaluated by relating quality-adjusted life years and differences in HAGOS pain to differences in costs over 12 months. The functioning of the intervention will be evaluated as implementation, mechanisms of change and contextual factors.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol was approved by the Committee on Health Research Ethics in the Central Denmark Region and registered at ClinicalTrials. Positive, negative and inconclusive findings will be disseminated through international peer-reviewed scientific journals and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04795843.

Total hip arthroplasty versus progressive resistance training in patients with severe hip osteoarthritis: protocol for a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled superiority trial

INTRODUCTION

Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is the leading cause for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although, being considered as the surgery of the century up to 23% of the patients report long-term pain, and deficits in physical function and muscle strength may persist after THA. Progressive resistance training (PRT) appears to improve multiple outcomes moderately in patients with hip OA. Current treatment selection is based on low-level evidence as no randomised controlled trials have compared THA to non-surgical treatment. The primary aim of this trial is to investigate whether THA followed by standard care is superior to 12 weeks of supervised PRT followed by 12 weeks of optional unsupervised PRT for improving hip pain and function in patients with severe hip OA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a protocol for a multicentre, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled superiority trial conducted at four hospitals across three healthcare regions in Denmark. 120 patients aged ≥50 years with clinical and radiographic hip OA found eligible for THA by an orthopaedic surgeon will be randomised to THA followed by standard care, or 12 weeks of PRT (allocation 1:1). The primary outcome will be change in patient-reported hip pain and function, measured using the Oxford Hip Score, from baseline to 6 months after initiating the treatment. Key secondary outcomes will be change in the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, University of California Los Angeles Activity Score, 40 m fast-paced walk test, 30 s chair stand test and occurrence of serious adverse events. Patients declining participation in the trial will be invited into a prospective observational cohort study.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial has been approved by The Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark (Project-ID: S-20180158). All results will be presented in peer-reviewed scientific journals and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04070027).

Effects of infrapatellar fat pad preservation versus resection on clinical outcomes after total knee arthroplasty in patients with knee osteoarthritis (IPAKA): study protocol for a multicentre, randomised, controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The infrapatellar fat pad (IPFP) is commonly resected during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for better exposure. However, our previous studies have suggested that IPFP size was protective against, while IPFP signal intensity alteration was detrimental on knee symptoms and structural abnormalities. We hypothesise that an IPFP with normal qualities, rather than abnormal qualities, should be preserved during TKA. The aim of this study is to compare, over a 1-year period, the postoperative clinical outcomes of IPFP preservation versus resection after TKA in patients with normal or abnormal IPFP signal intensity alteration on MRI.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Three hundred and sixty people with end-stage knee osteoarthritis and on the waiting list for TKA will be recruited and identified as normal IPFP quality (signal intensity alteration score ≤1) or abnormal IPFP quality (signal intensity alteration score ≥2). Patients in each hospital will then be randomly allocated to IPFP resection group or preservation group. The primary outcomes are the summed score of self-reported Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), KOOS subscales assessing function in daily activities and function in sport and recreation. Secondary endpoints will be included: KOOS subscales (pain, symptoms and quality of life), Knee Society Score, 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Pain, timed up-and-go test, patellar tendon shortening, 100 mm VAS self-reported efficacy of reduced pain and increased quality of life, and Insall-Salvati index assessed on plain X-ray. Adverse events will be recorded. Intention-to-treat analyses will be used.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the local Medical Ethics Committee (Zhujiang Hospital Ethics Committee, reference number 2017-GJGBK-001) and will be conducted according to the principle of the Declaration of Helsinki (64th, 2013) and the Good Clinical Practice standard, and in compliance with the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act . Data will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences, both nationally and internationally.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This trial was registered at Clinicaltrial.gov website on 19 October 2018 with identify number NCT03763448.

Cost-effectiveness of total knee replacement in addition to non-surgical treatment: a 2-year outcome from a randomised trial in secondary care in Denmark

OBJECTIVE

To assess the 24-month cost-effectiveness of total knee replacement (TKR) plus non-surgical treatment compared with non-surgical treatment with the option of later TKR if needed.

METHODS

100 adults with moderate-to-severe knee osteoarthritis found eligible for TKR by an orthopaedic surgeon in secondary care were randomised to TKR plus 12 weeks of supervised non-surgical treatment (exercise, education, diet, insoles and pain medication) or to supervised non-surgical treatment alone. Including quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) data from baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, effectiveness was measured as change at 24 months. Healthcare costs and transfer payments were derived from national registries. Incremental healthcare costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted and the probability of cost-effectiveness was estimated at the 22 665 Euros/QALY threshold defined by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

RESULTS

TKR plus non-surgical treatment was more expensive (mean of 23 076 vs 14 514 Euros) but also more effective than non-surgical treatment (mean 24-month improvement in QALY of 0.195 vs 0.056). While cost-effective in the unadjusted scenario (ICER of 18 497 Euros/QALY), TKR plus non-surgical treatment was not cost-effective compared with non-surgical treatment with the option of later TKR if needed in the adjusted (age, sex and baseline values), base-case scenario (ICER of 32 611 Euros/QALY) with a probability of cost-effectiveness of 23.2%. Including deaths, TKR plus non-surgical treatment was still not cost-effective (ICERs of 46 277 to 64 208 Euros/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

From a 24-month perspective, TKR plus non-surgical treatment does not appear to be cost-effective compared with non-surgical treatment with the option of later TKR if needed in patients with moderate-to-severe knee osteoarthritis and moderate intensity pain in secondary care in Denmark. Results were sensitive to changes, highlighting the need for further confirmatory research also assessing the long-term cost-effectiveness of TKR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01410409).

Total knee replacement and non-surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis: 2-year outcome from two parallel randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To compare 2-year outcomes of total knee replacement (TKR) followed by non-surgical treatment to that of non-surgical treatment alone and outcomes of the same non-surgical treatment to that of written advice.

DESIGN

In two randomized trials, 200 (mean age 66) adults with moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis (OA), 100 eligible for TKR and 100 not eligible for TKR, were randomized to TKR followed by non-surgical treatment, non-surgical treatment alone, or written advice. Non-surgical treatment consisted of 12 weeks of supervised exercise, education, dietary advice, use of insoles, and pain medication. The primary outcome was the mean score of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales, covering pain, symptoms, activities of daily living (ADL), and quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

Patients randomized to TKR had greater improvements than patients randomized to non-surgical treatment alone (difference of 18.3 points (95% CI; 11.3 to 25.3)), who in turn improved more than patients randomized to written advice (difference of 7.0 points (95% CI; 0.4 to 13.5)). Among patients eligible for TKR, 16 (32%) from the non-surgical group underwent TKR during 2 years and among those initially ineligible, seven patients (14%) from the non-surgical group and ten (20%) from the written advice group underwent TKR.

CONCLUSIONS

TKR followed by non-surgical treatment is more effective on pain and function than non-surgical treatment alone, which in turn is more effective than written advice. Two out of three patients with moderate to severe knee OA eligible for TKR delayed surgery for at least 2 years following non-surgical treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT01410409 and NCT01535001.

Patient-reported outcome after total hip arthroplasty: comparison between lateral and posterior approach

Background and purpose - Criticism of the lateral approach (LA) for hip arthroplasty is mainly based on the risk of poor patient-reported outcomes compared to the posterior approach (PA). However, there have been no controlled studies comparing patient-reported outcomes between them. In this randomized controlled trial, we tested the hypothesis that patient-reported outcomes are better in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA) with PA than in those who have undergone THA with LA, 12 months postoperatively. Patients and methods - 80 patients with hip osteoarthritis (mean age 61 years) were randomized to THA using PA or the modified direct LA. We recorded outcome measures preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively using the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were HOOS-Pain, HOOS-Quality-Of-Life, EQ-5D, UCLA Activity Score, and limping. Results - We found no statistically significant difference in the improvements in HOOS-PS between the treatment groups at 12-month follow-up. All secondary outcomes showed similar results except for limping, where PA patients improved significantly more than LA patients. Interpretation - Contrary to our hypothesis, patients treated with PA did not improve more than patients treated with LA regarding physical function, pain, physical activity, and quality of life 12 months postoperatively. However, limping was more pronounced in the LA patients.

Examination of muscle strength and pressure pain thresholds in knee osteoarthritis: test-retest reliability and agreement

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is associated with reduced muscle strength and pain sensitization. The purpose of this study was to determine intrarater reliability and agreement (measurement error) of isometric knee extensor and flexor muscle strength assessed using handheld dynamometry and of pressure pain thresholds (PPT; a measure of pain sensitization) from the knee, the leg, and the forearm assessed using handheld algometry in knee OA.

METHODS

A total of 20 subjects with knee OA participated in 2 sessions separated by 1 week. The highest of 4 examinations and the mean of the 3 highest examinations of muscle strength and the first and the mean of 2 PPT examinations were applied in the statistical analyses. Intrarater reliability was assessed using a 2-way random-effects model, consistency-type intraclass correlation coefficient, whereas agreement was assessed using 95% limits of agreement (LOA) as a percentage of the mean (LOA%).

RESULTS

Intraclass correlation coefficients for muscle strength were between 0.78 and 0.91 when using the highest examination and were between 0.86 and 0.94 when using the mean of the 3 highest examinations. Intraclass correlation coefficients for PPT were between 0.53 and 0.87 when using the first examination and were between 0.84 and 0.91 when using the mean of 2 examinations. Agreement (LOA%) for muscle strength ranged from 38.3% to 47.3% when using the highest examination and from 40.4% to 53.3% when using the mean of the 3 highest examinations. Agreement for PPT ranged from 54.2% to 80.6% when using the first examination and from 50.6% to 58.9% when using the mean of 2 PPT examinations.

DISCUSSION

A tendency toward improved intraclass correlation coefficients and LOA% (only for PPTs) was found when using the mean of more than 1 examination for both muscle strength and PPTs. Intrarater reliability was high to very high, whereas the LOA/LOA% indicated relatively high measurement errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Examination of muscle strength and PPTs in knee OA is reliable, but affected by the measurement error, which is important to consider when reporting the results of clinical trials and in clinical practice.

Criteria used when deciding on eligibility for total knee arthroplasty--Between thinking and doing

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision-making in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a complex process needing further clarification. The aim of this study was to compare TKA eligibility criteria considered most important by orthopedic surgeons (OSs) to characteristics of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) eventually found eligible for TKA.

METHODS

Nine OSs chose the five criteria most important when deciding on TKA eligibility. Cross-sectional data from 200 patients found either eligible (n=100) or not eligible (n=100) for TKA by one of the nine OS, were analyzed in a regression analyses with TKA eligibility as the dependent variable.

RESULTS

Radiographic severity (n=8), pain (n=9), functional disability (n=8) and not responding to the recommended non-surgical treatment (n=7) were considered most important by OSs. Associations (P<0.25) between TKA eligibility and criteria found important by the OS were demonstrated for worse radiographic severity and more functional limitations, but not for pain and not responding to the recommended non-surgical treatment. Furthermore, more comorbidities and higher Body Mass Index (BMI) were associated with TKA-eligibility, but not found important for TKA eligibility by the OS.

CONCLUSION

Radiographic severity and functional limitations were confirmed as drivers for TKA eligibility, while pain was not. Not responding to non-surgical treatment was not included in the decision-making, suggesting low uptake of clinical guidelines in clinical practice. This study highlights the complexity of the decision-making with some overlap between the criteria that OSs think they apply and what is actually applied in clinical practice.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Total Knee Replacement

BACKGROUND

More than 670,000 total knee replacements are performed annually in the United States; however, high-quality evidence to support the effectiveness of the procedure, as compared with nonsurgical interventions, is lacking.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled trial, we enrolled 100 patients with moderate-to-severe knee osteoarthritis who were eligible for unilateral total knee replacement. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo total knee replacement followed by 12 weeks of nonsurgical treatment (total-knee-replacement group) or to receive only the 12 weeks of nonsurgical treatment (nonsurgical-treatment group), which was delivered by physiotherapists and dietitians and consisted of exercise, education, dietary advice, use of insoles, and pain medication. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to 12 months in the mean score on four Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, covering pain, symptoms, activities of daily living, and quality of life (KOOS4); scores range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best).

RESULTS

A total of 95 patients completed the 12-month follow-up assessment. In the nonsurgical-treatment group, 13 patients (26%) underwent total knee replacement before the 12-month follow-up; in the total-knee-replacement group, 1 patient (2%) received only nonsurgical treatment. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the total-knee-replacement group had greater improvement in the KOOS4 score than did the nonsurgical-treatment group (32.5 vs. 16.0; adjusted mean difference, 15.8 [95% confidence interval, 10.0 to 21.5]). The total-knee-replacement group had a higher number of serious adverse events than did the nonsurgical-treatment group (24 vs. 6, P=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with knee osteoarthritis who were eligible for unilateral total knee replacement, treatment with total knee replacement followed by nonsurgical treatment resulted in greater pain relief and functional improvement after 12 months than did nonsurgical treatment alone. However, total knee replacement was associated with a higher number of serious adverse events than was nonsurgical treatment, and most patients who were assigned to receive nonsurgical treatment alone did not undergo total knee replacement before the 12-month follow-up. (Funded by the Obel Family Foundation and others; MEDIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01410409.).

Knee Confidence as It Relates to Self-reported and Objective Correlates of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Cross-sectional Study of 220 Patients

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to validate, if possible, previously reported associations and to investigate other potential associations between knee confidence and various self-reported and objective measures in an independent cohort of patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

BACKGROUND

Lack of knee confidence is a frequent symptom in patients with knee OA, but little is known of associations between knee confidence and other common correlates of knee OA.

METHODS

Baseline data from 220 patients with knee OA were applied in ordinal regression analyses, with knee confidence, assessed using item Q3 of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, as the dependent variable and self-reported (pain on walking, general health, fear of movement, self-efficacy, function, and previous serious injury) and objective measures (muscle strength, 20-m walk time, and radiographic severity of tibiofemoral OA) as predictor variables.

RESULTS

Most (95%) of the participants reported lack of knee confidence, and 54% experienced severe or extreme lack of knee confidence. Fear of movement (odds ratio [OR] = 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15, 3.68), pain on walking (OR = 1.21; 95% CI: 1.09, 1.34), and general health (OR = 0.024; 95% CI: 0.002, 0.259) explained 19% of the variance in knee confidence (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Severe lack of knee confidence is a common finding in individuals with knee OA. Pain on walking was confirmed as a correlate of knee confidence, whereas muscle strength was not. Fear of movement and poor general health were new variables associated with lack of knee confidence. The noncorrelations or poor correlations with other tested variables suggest that a lack of knee confidence may represent an independent treatment target in knee OA of importance to improve mobility. Trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01410409 and NCT01535001).

Translation and validation of 'The Knee Society Clinical Rating System' into Spanish

PURPOSE

The Knee Society Clinical Rating System (KSS) is a questionnaire evaluating knee function itself and the patient's ability to walk and climb stairs. The aim of our study is to present the validated translation of KSS into Spanish.

METHODS

The validated method of translation-retrotranslation was used to translate KSS into Spanish. Three hundred and sixteen patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty, before surgery and 6 months postoperative, completed the questionnaire (with an orthopedist's help). Psychometric properties of feasibility (percentage of no answers), validity and sensitivity to change (test's ability to detect change in patients' functional status over time) were assessed. In the second part of the study, the translated version of KSS was compared with two already validated questionnaires (SF-36 and WOMAC).

RESULTS

During the translation process, item 3 (ROM) presented low appropriateness and null comprehensibility. The alternative writing proposed was 'for every 5°, we sum up 1 point, as if 8° were 1 point, to obtain the maximum scoring of 25 points you should bend more than 200°'. Feasibility: the item 'malalignment' obtained 15 % of missing item at visit 1. The percentage of invalid items was high in both visits (60 and 47 %).

VALIDITY

the coefficients of convergent correlation with WOMAC and SF-36 scales confirm the questionnaire's validity. Sensitivity to change: significant differences were found in all cases between the mean scores comparing both visits.

CONCLUSION

The translated version 1.1 of KSS (final version) has shown to be feasible, valid and sensible to changes within the clinical practice of patients undergoing primary knees arthroplasty.

Osteoprotegerin reduces the development of pain behaviour and joint pathology in a model of osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Increased subchondral bone turnover may contribute to pain in osteoarthritis (OA).

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the analgesic potential of a modified version of osteoprotegerin (osteoprotegerin-Fc (OPG-Fc)) in the monosodium iodoacetate (MIA) model of OA pain.

METHODS

Male Sprague Dawley rats (140-260 g) were treated with either OPG-Fc (3 mg/kg, subcutaneously) or vehicle (phosphate-buffered saline) between days 1 and 27 (pre-emptive treatment) or days 21 and 27 (therapeutic treatment) after an intra-articular injection of MIA (1 mg/50 µl) or saline. A separate cohort of rats received the bisphosphonate zoledronate (100 µg/kg, subcutaneously) between days 1 and 25 post-MIA injection. Incapacitance testing and von Frey (1-15 g) hind paw withdrawal thresholds were used to assess pain behaviour. At the end of the study, rats were killed and the knee joints and spinal cord removed for analysis. Immunohistochemical studies using Iba-1 and GFAP quantified levels of activation of spinal microglia and astrocytes, respectively. Joint sections were stained with haematoxylin and eosin or Safranin-O fast green and scored for matrix proteoglycan and overall joint morphology. The numbers of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase-positive osteoclasts were quantified. N=10 rats/group.

RESULTS

Pre-emptive treatment with OPG-Fc significantly attenuated the development of MIA-induced changes in weightbearing, but not allodynia. OPG-Fc decreased osteoclast number, inhibited the formation of osteophytes and improved structural pathology within the joint similarly to the decrease seen after pretreatment with the bisphosphonate, zoledronate. Therapeutic treatment with OPG-Fc decreased pain behaviour, but did not improve pathology in rats with established joint damage.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that early targeting of osteoclasts may reduce pain associated with OA.

Efficacy of multimodal, systematic non-surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis for patients not eligible for a total knee replacement: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

It is recommended that non-operative treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) should be individually tailored and include multiple treatment modalities. Despite these recommendations, no one has yet investigated the efficacy of combining several non-surgical treatment modalities in a randomised controlled study. The purpose of this randomised controlled study is to examine if an optimised, combined non-surgical treatment programme results in greater improvements in pain, function and quality of life in comparison with usual care in patients with KOA who are not eligible for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will include 100 consecutive patients from the North Denmark Region not eligible for TKA with radiographic KOA (K-L grade ≥1) and mean pain during the previous week of ≤60 mm (0-100). The participants will be randomised to receive either a 12-week non-surgical treatment programme consisting of patient education, exercise, diet, insoles, paracetamol and/or NSAIDs or usual care (two information leaflets containing information on KOA and advice regarding the above non-surgical treatment). The primary outcome will be the change from baseline to 12 months on the self-report questionnaire Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)(4) defined as the average score for the subscale scores for pain, symptoms, activities of daily living and quality of life. Secondary outcomes include the five individual KOOS subscale scores, pain on a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale, EQ-5D, self-efficacy, pain pressure thresholds, postural control and isometric knee flexion and knee extension strength.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the local Ethics Committee of The North Denmark Region (N-20110085) and the protocol conforms to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Data collection will be completed by April 2014. Publications will be ready for submission in the summer of 2014.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This study is registered with http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01535001).