Effect of Soft Braces on Pain and Physical Function in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review With Meta-Analyses

Evaluation and Treatment of Knee Pain: A Review

Importance

Approximately 5% of all primary care visits in adults are related to knee pain. Osteoarthritis (OA), patellofemoral pain, and meniscal tears are among the most common causes of knee pain.

Observations

Knee OA, affecting an estimated 654 million people worldwide, is the most likely diagnosis of knee pain in patients aged 45 years or older who present with activity-related knee joint pain with no or less than 30 minutes of morning stiffness (95% sensitivity; 69% specificity). Patellofemoral pain typically affects people younger than 40 years who are physically active and has a lifetime prevalence of approximately 25%. The presence of anterior knee pain during a squat is approximately 91% sensitive and 50% specific for patellofemoral pain. Meniscal tears affect an estimated 12% of the adult population and can occur following acute trauma (eg, twisting injury) in people younger than 40 years. Alternatively, a meniscal tear may be a degenerative condition present in patients with knee OA who are aged 40 years or older. The McMurray test, consisting of concurrent knee rotation (internal or external to test lateral or medial meniscus, respectively) and extension (61% sensitivity; 84% specificity), and joint line tenderness (83% sensitivity; 83% specificity) assist diagnosis of meniscal tears. Radiographic imaging of all patients with possible knee OA is not recommended. First-line management of OA comprises exercise therapy, weight loss (if overweight), education, and self-management programs to empower patients to better manage their condition. Surgical referral for knee joint replacement can be considered for patients with end-stage OA (ie, no or minimal joint space with inability to cope with pain) after using all appropriate conservative options. For patellofemoral pain, hip and knee strengthening exercises in combination with foot orthoses or patellar taping are recommended, with no indication for surgery. Conservative management (exercise therapy for 4-6 weeks) is also appropriate for most meniscal tears. For severe traumatic (eg, bucket-handle) tears, consisting of displaced meniscal tissue, surgery is likely required. For degenerative meniscal tears, exercise therapy is first-line treatment; surgery is not indicated even in the presence of mechanical symptoms (eg, locking, catching).

Conclusions and Relevance

Knee OA, patellofemoral pain, and meniscal tears are common causes of knee pain, can be diagnosed clinically, and can be associated with significant disability. First-line treatment for each condition consists of conservative management, with a focus on exercise, education, and self-management.

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.

Chinese guidelines for the rehabilitation treatment of knee osteoarthritis: An CSPMR evidence-based practice guideline

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is the most common degenerative joint disease in China, causing a huge economic burden on patients, families, and society. Standardized KOA rehabilitation treatment is an important means to prevent and treat the disease and promote the development of high-quality medical services. This guideline is updated on the basis of the 2016 and 2019 editions.

METHODS

Clinical questions regarding rehabilitation assessment and treatment were selected through clinical questions screening and deconstruction, and multiple rounds of Delphi questionnaire consultation. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) was used as the theoretical framework, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to grade the quality of evidence and recommendations.

RESULTS

The reporting of this guideline followed the standard of Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT). Taking into account patients' preferences and values and the needs of Chinese clinical practice, a total of 11 clinical questions and 28 recommendations were established. The clinical questions were grouped into two categories: KOA assessment (body function, body structure, activity and participation, quality of life, and environmental factors and clinical outcomes assessment, resulting in 9 recommendations) and KOA treatment (health education, therapeutic exercise, therapeutic modalities, occupational therapy, assistive devices, and regenerative rehabilitation approaches, resulting in 19 recommendations).

CONCLUSION

This is the first evidence-based guideline for KOA rehabilitation in China utilizing the ICF framework. This guideline provides key guidance for developing systematic, standardized, and precise rehabilitation protocols for KOA across various healthcare settings.

Combined Rehabilitation Protocol in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: Comparative Study of Extremely Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields and Soft Elastic Knee Brace Effect

The investigation of this observational case-control study aimed at determining the effectiveness of a combined treatment of extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF) with a soft elastic knee brace versus ELF alone in knee osteoarthritis (KOA) with respect to a reduction in pain and functional recovery. We hypothesized that the combined use of ELF and a soft elastic knee brace may provide better results. Thirty-five patients (N = 35, divided into Group 1 = ELF and Group 2 = ELF with the soft elastic knee brace) were analyzed. The rehabilitative protocol consisted of 10 sessions of antiphlogistic and antiedema programs (first cycle) for 2 weeks, followed by twelve sessions of bone repair and connective tissue repair programs (second cycle) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) for 4 weeks. Patient evaluations were conducted at baseline (T0) and after 2 (T1) and 4 (T2) weeks of treatment. A follow-up evaluation was conducted 6 weeks after treatment (T3). The LIMFA© Therapy System was used to create multifrequency magnetoelectric fields with an intensity of 100 µT and a low-frequency field. The Incrediwear Cred 40 knee sleeve (Incred) was used for alleviating knee pain. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Lysholm score (Ls) were used as outcome measures. The results showed that pain at rest (Vr), pain in motion (Vm), KOOS, and Ls were significantly affected by ELF over time. In conclusion, Group 2 had a better response in terms of pain resolution at rest (p < 0.05) and a concurrent better response at T3 in terms of functional recovery (p < 0.05).

A comparison of the biomechanical and clinical effects of a biaxial ankle-foot orthosis and lateral wedge insole in individuals with medial knee osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare a biaxial ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) with a lateral wedge insole in terms of the biomechanical and clinical outcomes in individuals with knee osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-over randomized design was used where 31 individuals (25 females and six males, mean age of 52.19 ± 4.12 years) with knee osteoarthritis wore each intervention for two weeks with two weeks washout period. Three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data and clinical outcomes were collected to evaluate the effects of each intervention on knee adduction moment (KAM), pain, stiffness, and function.

RESULTS

Both orthoses significantly improved pain by 17 and 22%, function by 11 and 14%, the first peak KAM by 15.7 and 19.2%, the second peak KAM by 10.4 and 16.7%, and KAM impulse by 14.8 and 22.2%, respectively. However, the biaxial AFO significantly reduced the KAM and improved function compared to the lateral wedge insole (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study have shown that both orthoses have a potential role in the conservative management of medial knee osteoarthritis. The biaxial AFO proved statistically better at improving function and KAM; though these differences do not seem to be clinically significant.IMPLICATION FOR REHABILITATIONOrthotic interventions have been reported to be effective in the management of medial knee osteoarthritis.Lateral wedge insole and biaxial ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) are effective in the improvement of pain, function, and knee adduction moment (KAM) in people with medial knee osteoarthritis.The biaxial AFO, compared with lateral wedge insole, contributes to statistically more improvement of function and KAM. However, these differences do not seem to be clinically significant.

Effect of compression by elastic bandages on pain and function in individuals with knee osteoarthritis: protocol of a randomised controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Although compression is used to control pain in knee osteoarthritis (KOA), its clinical application is poorly supported, and there is a lack of scientific evidence to support its clinical use. As a low-cost and accessible protocol, compression using elastic bands could be a non-pharmacological intervention to reduce pain and improve physical function in individuals with KOA. This study aims to evaluate the effects of compression on pain and function in individuals with KOA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A randomised controlled clinical trial will be conducted. Individuals with KOA (n=90; both sexes; between 40 and 75 years old) will be allocated to three groups (n=30/group): compression (compression by the elastic bandage on the affected knee, once a day for 20 min, on four consecutive days); sham (same protocol, but the elastic band is placed around the affected knee without compression) and control (no intervention). The individuals in the three groups will be evaluated 1 day before the first intervention, 1 day after the last intervention, and at the 12th and 24th weeks after the end of the intervention. Pain intensity by the Visual Analogue Scale and pain scale from Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) will be the primary outcomes. The secondary variables will be physical function assessed by the WOMAC questionnaire and physical tests (step test; 30 s sit and stand test; 40 m accelerated walk test). The Global Rating of Change Scale (GRC) will also be applied to quantify the volunteers' perceived change.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The project was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of São Carlos, São Paulo, Brazil (3955692). The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04724902.

Effects of Hip Bracing on Gait Biomechanics, Pain and Function in Subjects With Mild to Moderate Hip Osteoarthritis

Hip Osteoarthritis (HOA) is a common joint disease with serious impact on the quality of life of the affected persons. Additionally, persons with HOA often show alterations in gait biomechanics. Developing effective conservative treatment strategies is of paramount importance, as joint replacement is only indicated for end-stage HOA. In contrast to knee osteoarthritis, little is known about the effectiveness of hip bracing for the management of HOA. Studies analysing mechanically unloading hip braces partly showed beneficial results. However, methodological limitations of these studies, such as small sample sizes or lack of control groups, limit the applicability of the results. Additionally, mechanically unloading braces might impose restrictions on motion and comfort and thus, might not be suitable for people with only mild or moderate symptoms. The aim of this study was to comprehensively quantify the effects of unilateral HOA as well as functional hip bracing on gait biomechanics, pain, proprioception and functional capacity in people with mild to moderate HOA. Hip and pelvis biomechanics during walking were analysed in 21 subjects with mild to moderate HOA under three bracing conditions: unbraced, immediately after brace application and after 1 week of brace usage. Additionally, pain, hip proprioception and functional capacity were assessed. A matched group of 21 healthy subjects was included as reference. Kinematic and kinetic data were collected using a 16-camera infrared motion capturing system and two force plates. Visual analogue scales, an angle reproduction test and a 6-min walking test were applied to measure pain, hip proprioception and functional capacity, respectively. Subjects with HOA walked slower, with reduced step length, sagittal hip range of motion and peak extension angle and had a reduced functional capacity. After 1 week of brace application step length, walking speed and functional capacity were significantly increased. Additionally, pain perception was significantly lower in the intervention period. These results encourage the application of functional hip braces in the management of mild to moderate HOA. However, as key parameters of HOA gait such as a reduced peak extension angle remained unchanged, the underlying mechanisms remain partly unclear and have to be considered in the future.

Alternatives to Knee Braces

Knee braces continue to be a widely utilized piece of medical equipment, ranging from simple over the counter sleeves to more complex functional braces, with the ability to provide electrical stimulation to muscle groups. Despite their popularity, alternatives to knee braces exist for patients who find braces to be ineffective, uncomfortable, cumbersome, or overly expensive. While high-quality studies are lacking for modalities such as neoprene sleeves, compression stockings, and kinesiotaping, there is promising evidence that these interventions can confer an element of stability and pain relief for a variety of knee pathologies both with regard to acute and chronic injuries as well as in the postoperative rehabilitation period. While no "holy grail" exists for the ideal brace, or bracing alternative, it is important for providers to be aware of the options available to patients as well as the current evidence for these various modalities, so that the provider can best guide musculoskeletal care.

Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields: the PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance

Poor reporting of medical and healthcare systematic reviews is a problem from which the sports and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science fields are not immune. Transparent, accurate and comprehensive systematic review reporting helps researchers replicate methods, readers understand what was done and why, and clinicians and policy-makers implement results in practice. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and its accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document provide general reporting examples for systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. However, implementation guidance for sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science does not exist. The Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science (PERSiST) guidance attempts to address this problem. Nineteen content experts collaborated with three methods experts to identify examples of exemplary reporting in systematic reviews in sport and exercise medicine (including physical activity), musculoskeletal rehabilitation (including physiotherapy), and sports science, for each of the PRISMA 2020 Statement items. PERSiST aims to help: (1) systematic reviewers improve the transparency and reporting of systematic reviews and (2) journal editors and peer reviewers make informed decisions about systematic review reporting quality.

Synopsis of the 2020 US Department of Veterans Affairs/US Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline: The Non-Surgical Management of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis

In July 2020, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and US Department of Defense (DoD) approved a new joint clinical practice guideline for the non-surgical management of hip and knee osteoarthritis. This synopsis highlights some of the recommendations. In February 2019, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group convened a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the National Academy of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions, systematically searched (ie, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE PreMEDLINE, PubMed, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality website) and evaluated the literature, created a simple 1-page algorithm, and advanced 19 recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. This synopsis summarizes key recommendations in all 6 topics covered in the guideline. These topics are diagnosis, self-management, physical therapy, pharmacotherapy, orthobiologics, and complementary and integrative health.

Association between changes in the knee adduction moment and changes in knee pain and function in response to non-surgical biomechanical interventions for medial knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review

There is lack of understanding of the relationship between knee adduction moment (KAM) reductions and improvements in pain or function in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Moreover, there is no systematic review describing the longitudinal relationship between KAM changes and subsequent changes in pain and/or physical function. We aimed (1) to investigate the relationship between changes in KAM induced by non-surgical biomechanical interventions and consecutive changes in pain and/or physical function in patients with medial KOA and (2) to compare this relationship for different interventions. We considered eligible all RCTs using biomechanical interventions aimed to reduce KAM in KOA patients, that measured pain/function. We used Cohen's d effect size to quantify outcome measurements. 14 papers reporting 11 studies were identified. Braces were tested in 6 studies, insoles in 5 studies, shoes in 3 studies and gait retraining in 2 studies. Methodological differences were large among studies. Large effect sizes (≥0.8) changes in pain/function were observed with interventions having at least a small KAM effect size (≥0.2), suggesting an association between KAM and pain/function changes. A linear trend was observed between inter-intervention KAM and VAS pain effect sizes, based on 4 studies. No firm conclusions could be drawn for the different intervention types. There was a trend toward larger KAM reductions leading to larger improvements in pain/function in non-surgical biomechanical interventions. Additional high-quality RCT with consistent methodology are needed to fully characterize the association between KAM and pain/function changes.

A Malaysian Delphi consensus on managing knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The 2013 Malaysian Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Osteoarthritis (OA) recommend a linear step-up approach to manage knee OA. However, patients with knee OA often require a multimodal approach to address OA-related pain symptoms and functional limitations. This consensus aimed to provide doctors with an updated set of evidence-based, clinical experience-guided recommendations to manage knee OA.

METHODS

A multi-speciality expert panel consisting of nine Malaysian physicians from different healthcare settings who manage a diverse OA patient population was convened. Using a combination of the ADAPTE process and modified Delphi method, the panel reviewed current evidence on the management of knee OA and synthesised a set of nine recommendations on the management of knee OA, supported by an algorithm that summarises the consensus' core messages.

RESULTS

A multimodal intervention strategy is the mainstay of OA management and the choice of any single or multimodal intervention may vary over the course of the disease. Overall, a non-pharmacological core treatment set of patient education, weight loss and exercise is recommended for all patients. When pharmacotherapy is indicated, symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis are recommended at the early stage of disease, and they can be paired with physical therapy as background treatment. Concurrent advanced pharmacotherapy that includes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intraarticular injections and short-term weak opioids can be considered if patients do not respond sufficiently to background treatment. Patients with severe symptomatic knee OA should be considered for knee replacement surgery. Management should begin with specific treatments with the least systemic exposure or toxicity, and the choice of treatment should be determined as a shared decision between patients and their team of healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus presents nine recommendations that advocate an algorithmic approach in the management of patients living with knee OA. They are applicable to patients receiving treatment from primary to tertiary care providers in Malaysia as well as other countries.

Intermittent vibrational stimulation enhances mobility during stair navigation in patients with knee pain

BACKGROUND

Reduced quadriceps function and proprioception can cause decreased mobility during stair navigation in patients with knee pain. Patients can benefit from interventions to mitigate pain and restore quadriceps function. Activating the somatosensory system via intermittent vibrational stimulation has the potential to improve stair navigation mobility in patients with knee pain by moderating quadriceps inhibition and enhancing proprioception.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the effects of intermittent vibrational stimulus synchronized to stair ambulation on muscle activity, kinematics, kinetics, and pain using a randomized controlled clinical trial design.

METHODS

Thirty-eight patients with knee pain were enrolled into a blinded cross-over study, and twenty-nine patients completed all assessments and analyses. Subjects were randomly assigned sequentially to both an active Treatment A (active) and passive Treatment B (passive) worn at the knee during ambulation for 4 weeks with a 2-week washout period between treatments.

RESULTS

Knee pain during stair navigation was significantly reduced only with Treatment A (P = 0.007). During ascent, Treatment A (active) significantly increased vastus lateralis activation (P = 0.01), increased knee flexion moment (P = 0.04) and decreased trunk flexion angles (P = 0.015) between baseline and 4-week follow-up. After using passive Treatment B, there were no significant differences in pain (P = 0.19), knee flexion moment (P = 0.09), and trunk flexion angles (P = 0.23). Changes in muscle function correlated significantly with changes in knee flexion moment and trunk flexion with Treatment A (P < 0.015). Descending differed from ascending in response to Treatment A with significantly decreased knee flexion moment(P = 0.04), hip(P = 0.02) and ankle(P = 0.04) flexion angles. Treatment B significantly reduced hip flexion angles (P = 0.005) but not knee flexion moment (P = 0.85).

SIGNIFICANCE

The results of this study suggest that intermittent vibration can improve joint motion and loading during stair navigation by enhancing quadriceps function during stair ascent and improving movement control during stair descent by modifying an adaptive flexed movement pattern in the lower limb.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of bracing in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis management: protocol for a multicentre, primary care, randomised, parallel-group, superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Brace effectiveness for knee osteoarthritis (OA) remains unclear and international guidelines offer conflicting recommendations. Our trial will determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of adding knee bracing (matched to patients' clinical and radiographic presentation and with adherence support) to a package of advice, written information and exercise instruction delivered by physiotherapists.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A multicentre, pragmatic, two-parallel group, single-blind, superiority, randomised controlled trial with internal pilot and nested qualitative study. 434 eligible participants with symptomatic knee OA identified from general practice, physiotherapy referrals and self-referral will be randomised 1:1 to advice, written information and exercise instruction and knee brace versus advice, written information and exercise instruction alone. The primary analysis will be intention-to-treat comparing treatment arms on the primary outcome (Knee Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS)-5) (composite knee score) at the primary endpoint (6 months) adjusted for prespecified covariates. Secondary analysis of KOOS subscales (pain, other symptoms, activities of daily living, function in sport and recreation, knee-related quality of life), self-reported pain, instability (buckling), treatment response, physical activity, social participation, self-efficacy and treatment acceptability will occur at 3, 6, and 12 months postrandomisation. Analysis of covariance and logistic regression will model continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. Treatment effect estimates will be presented as mean differences or ORs with 95% CIs. Economic evaluation will estimate cost-effectiveness. Semistructured interviews to explore acceptability and experiences of trial interventions will be conducted with participants and physiotherapists delivering interventions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

North West Preston Research Ethics Committee, the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research in Wales approved the study (REC Reference: 19/NW/0183; IRAS Reference: 247370). This protocol has been coproduced with stakeholders including patients and public. Findings will be disseminated to patients and a range of stakeholders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN28555470.

Effects of mechanical interventions in the management of knee osteoarthritis: protocol for an OA Trial Bank systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent and disabling musculoskeletal condition. Biomechanical factors may play a key role in the aetiology of knee OA, therefore, a broad class of interventions involves the application or wear of devices designed to mechanically support knees with OA. These include gait aids, bracing, taping, orthotics and footwear. The literature regarding efficacy of mechanical interventions has been conflicting or inconclusive, and this may be because certain subgroups with knee OA respond better to mechanical interventions. Our primary aim is to identify subgroups with knee OA who respond favourably to mechanical interventions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a systematic review to identify randomised clinical trials of any mechanical intervention for the treatment of knee OA. We will invite lead authors of eligible studies to share individual participant data (IPD). We will perform an IPD meta-analysis for each type of mechanical intervention to evaluate efficacy, with our main outcome being pain. Where IPD are not available, this will be achieved using aggregate data. We will then evaluate five potential treatment effect modifiers using a two-stage approach. If data permit, we will also evaluate whether biomechanics mediate the effects of mechanical interventions on pain in knee OA.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No new data will be collected in this study. We will adhere to institutional, national and international regulations regarding the secure and confidential sharing of IPD, addressing ethics as indicated. We will disseminate findings via international conferences, open-source publication in peer-reviewed journals and summaries posted on websites serving the public and clinicians.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020155466.

Valgus knee bracing may have no long-term effect on pain improvement and functional activity in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

Background

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA), with a high incidence in old-age population, adversely affects their life quality. The valgus knee bracing is an important physical therapy for KOA, but its clinical effects on pain release and functional improvement remained unclear. This meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of valgus knee bracing in patients with KOA.

Methods

A meta-analysis of clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on pain and functional changes in patients with KOA after using valgus knee braces. The search period was ranged from the inception of the database to May 2020. The enrolled research databases included PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Two investigators independently formulated inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria and screened and determined the final enrolled literature. Then the outcome indicators were extracted and organized from the included literature, and the risk of bias was assessed by Cochrane Handbook 5.0.1.

Results

A total of 10 articles were included in this study, including 739 patients. Eight articles were related to the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and the results showed that RR = − 0.29, 95% CI − 0.73, 0.15], P = 0.20; four articles were related to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function score, and the results showed that RR = − 0.15, 95% CI [− 0.41, 0.11], P = 0.26; two articles were related to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the results showed that RR = 0.58, 95% CI [− 4.25, 5.42], P = 0.81; and three articles were related to the KOOS Activities of Daily Living (KOOS-ADL), and the results showed that RR = 0.04, 95% CI [− 0.62, 0.69], P = 0.91. These results indicated that the valgus knee bracing has no statistical significance in pain and functional activity improvement of patients with KOA. The subgroup analysis showed that the follow-up time was the source of the heterogeneity of the VAS pain score.

Conclusion

Our current evidence suggests that valgus knee bracing may not improve pain release and function activates in KOA patients in the long-term period, but only being beneficial to the short-term rehabilitation.

Physical Methods of Rehabilitation for Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Scientometric Analysis of Evidence-Based Studies

Relevance. A rise in the life expectancy of the planet’s population, lack of exercise and growth in the number of people suffering from overweight lead to an increase in the number of patients suffering from diseases of the musculoskeletal system, including osteoarthritis. Given the absence of specific pharmacological treatment of osteoarthritis, as well as the increase in the number of patients with co-morbid pathology, it became necessary to search for the proven technologies of physical and rehabilitation medicine (PRM). The purpose of the study was to identify the most effective PRM technologies in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis and to formulate recommendations on their use for practitioners, based on the proof obtained through the analysis of evidence-based high quality studies on the application of PRM technology. Materials and Methods. Over the past decade, there has been a significant increase in the number of studies on non-pharmacological methods of osteoarthritis treatment. The most studied of the PRM technologies with the proven effect were the following: physical exercises combined with traditional healthy gymnastics, acupuncture, peloid therapy, balneo therapy, as well as low-frequency electrotherapy, ultrasound therapy and infrared laser therapy. Conclusion. The use of PRM technologies in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis should be based on the results of high-quality randomized controlled clinical trials which serve as the basis for the development of clinical recommendations. The process of the obtained data analysis should be conducted on the regular basis.

An updated algorithm recommendation for the management of knee osteoarthritis from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO)

OBJECTIVES

The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) sought to revisit the 2014 algorithm recommendations for knee osteoarthritis (OA), in light of recent efficacy and safety evidence, in order to develop an updated stepwise algorithm that provides practical guidance for the prescribing physician that is applicable in Europe and internationally.

METHODS

Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) process, a summary of evidence document for each intervention in OA was provided to all members of an ESCEO working group, who were required to evaluate and vote on the strength of recommendation for each intervention. Based on the evidence collected, and on the strength of recommendations afforded by consensus of the working group, the final algorithm was constructed.

RESULTS

An algorithm for management of knee OA comprising a stepwise approach and incorporating consensus on 15 treatment recommendations was prepared by the ESCEO working group. Both "strong" and "weak" recommendations were afforded to different interventions. The algorithm highlights the continued importance of non-pharmacological interventions throughout the management of OA. Benefits and limitations of different pharmacological treatments are explored in this article, with particular emphasis on safety issues highlighted by recent literature analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated ESCEO stepwise algorithm, developed by consensus from clinical experts in OA and informed by available evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatments, provides practical, current guidance that will enable clinicians to deliver patient-centric care in OA practice.

Nordic clinical guidelines for orthotic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument

BACKGROUND

High-quality clinical practice guidelines are necessary for effective use of resources both at an individual patient- and national-level. Nordic clinical practice guidelines recommendations for orthotic treatment of knee osteoarthritis vary and little is known about their quality.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to critically evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines in orthotic management of knee osteoarthritis in the Nordic countries.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Four national clinical practice guidelines for treatment of knee osteoarthritis were assessed for methodological rigour and transparency by four independent assessors using the AGREE II instrument. Summary domain scores and inter-rater agreement (Kendall's W) were calculated.

RESULTS

Domain scores indicate that many guidelines have not sufficiently addressed stakeholder involvement (average score: 55%), applicability (20%) and editorial independence (33%) in the development process. Inter-rater agreement for assessors indicated 'good' agreement for clinical practice guidelines from Finland, Norway and Sweden (W = 0.653, p < 0.001; W = 0.512, p = 0.003 and W = 0.532, p = 0.002, respectively) and 'strong' agreement for the clinical practice guideline from Denmark (W = 0.800, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Quality of clinical practice guidelines for orthotic treatment of knee osteoarthritis in the Nordic region is variable. Future guideline development should focus on improving methodology by involving relevant stakeholders (e.g. certified prosthetist/orthotists (CPOs)), specifying conflicts of interest and providing guidance for implementation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The current review suggests that, for the Nordic region, there are areas of improvement which can be addressed, which ensure clinical practice guidelines are developed under stringent conditions and based on sound methods. These improvements would ensure knee osteoarthritis patients are receiving orthotic interventions based on appropriate guidance from published guidelines.

The immediate effect of a soft knee brace on dynamic knee instability in persons with knee osteoarthritis

Objectives

Wearing a soft knee brace has been shown to reduce self-reported knee instability in persons with knee OA. There is a need to assess whether a soft knee brace has a beneficial effect on objectively assessed dynamic knee instability as well. The aims of the study were to evaluate the effect of a soft knee brace on objectively assessed dynamic knee instability and to assess the difference in effect between a non-tight and a tight soft knee brace in persons with knee OA.

Methods

Thirty-eight persons with knee OA and self-reported knee instability participated in a laboratory study. A within-subject design was used comparing no brace vs brace and comparing a non-tight vs a tight brace. The primary outcome measure was dynamic knee instability, expressed by the perturbation response (PR). The PR reflects deviation in the mean knee varus-valgus angle during level walking after a controlled mechanical perturbation. Linear mixed-effect model analysis was used to evaluate the effect of a brace on dynamic knee instability.

Results

Wearing a brace significantly reduced the PR compared with not wearing a brace (B = -0.16, P = 0.01). There was no difference between a non-tight and a tight brace (B = -0.03, P = 0.60).

Conclusion

This study is the first to report that wearing a soft knee brace reduces objectively assessed dynamic knee instability in persons with knee OA. Wearing a soft brace results in an objective improvement of knee instability beyond subjectively reported improvement.

Trial registration

Nederlands Trial register (trialregister.nl) NTR6363.

Decreased Pain and Improved Dynamic Knee Instability Mediate the Beneficial Effect of Wearing a Soft Knee Brace on Activity Limitations in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether improvement of proprioception, pain, or dynamic knee instability mediates the effect of wearing a soft knee brace on activity limitations in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of data for 44 patients with knee OA who were enrolled in a laboratory-based trial evaluating the effect of wearing a commercially available soft knee brace. Activity limitations were assessed with the 10-meter walk test and the Get Up and Go test. Knee joint proprioception was assessed by an active joint position sense test; pain was assessed on a numeric rating scale (NRS) (range 0-10); pressure pain threshold (PPT) was assessed with a hand-held pressure algometer; dynamic knee instability was expressed by the perturbation response, i.e., a measure reflecting a deviation in mean knee varus-valgus angle after a controlled mechanical perturbation on a treadmill, with respect to level walking. Mediation analysis was conducted using the product of coefficients approach. Confidence intervals were calculated with a bootstrap procedure.

RESULTS

A decrease in pain (scored on an NRS) and a decrease in dynamic knee instability mediated the effect of wearing a soft knee brace on the reduction of activity limitations (P < 0.05), while changes in proprioception and PPT did not mediate this effect (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that decreased pain and reduced dynamic knee instability are pathways by which wearing a soft knee brace decreases activity limitations in patients with knee OA.

Gaps in appropriate use of treatment strategies in osteoarthritis

Optimal management of osteoarthritis (OA) requires a combination of therapies, with behavioral (e.g., exercise and weight management) and rehabilitative components at the core, accompanied by pharmacological treatments and, in later stages, consideration of joint replacement surgery. Although multiple sets of OA treatment guidelines have been developed, there are gaps in the implementation of these recommendations. Key areas of concern include the underuse of exercise, weight management, and other behavioral and rehabilitation strategies as well as the overuse of opioid analgesics. In this review, we describe the major categories of treatment strategies for OA, including self-management, physical activity, weight management, physical therapy and other rehabilitative therapies, pharmacotherapies, and joint replacement surgery. For each category, we discuss the current evidence base to report on appropriate use, data regarding adherence to treatment recommendations, and potential approaches to optimize use.

The immediate effect of a soft knee brace on pain, activity limitations, self-reported knee instability, and self-reported knee confidence in patients with knee osteoarthritis

Background

We aimed to (i) evaluate the immediate effect of a soft knee brace on pain, activity limitations, self-reported knee instability, and self-reported knee confidence, and (ii) to assess the difference in effect between a non-tight and a tight soft brace in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

Forty-four patients with knee OA and self-reported knee instability participated in the single-session, laboratory, experimental study. A within-subject design was used, comparing a soft brace with no brace, and comparing a non-tight with a tight soft brace. The outcome measures were pain, self-reported knee instability and knee confidence during level and perturbed walking on the treadmill and activity limitations (10-m walk test and the get up and go (GUG) test). Linear mixed-effect model analysis for continuous outcomes and logistic generalized estimating equations for categorical outcomes were used to evaluate the effect of wearing a soft brace.

Results

Wearing a soft brace significantly reduced pain during level walking (B − 0.60, P = 0.001) and perturbed walking (B − 0.80, P < 0.001), reduced the time to complete the 10-m walk (B − 0.23, P < 0.001) and the GUG tests (B − 0.23, P = 0.004), reduced self-reported knee instability during level walking (OR 0.41, P = 0.002) and perturbed walking (OR 0.36, P < 0.001), and reduced lack of confidence in the knees during level walking (OR 0.45, P < 0.001) and perturbed walking (OR 0.56, P < 0.001), compared with not wearing a soft brace. There was no difference in effects between a non-tight and tight brace, except for the 10-m walk test. Wearing a tight brace significantly reduced the time to complete the 10-m walk test in comparison with wearing a non-tight brace (B − 0.11, P = 0.03).

Conclusion

The results of this study indicate that a soft brace is an efficacious intervention targeting pain, activity limitations, self-reported knee instability, and knee confidence in the immediate term in patients with knee OA. Further studies are needed evaluating the mode of action based on exerted pressure, and on the generalization to functioning in daily life.

Trial registration

trialregister.nl, NTR6363. Retrospectively registered on 15 May 2017.