Effect of home-based hand exercises in women with hand osteoarthritis: a randomised controlled trial

An open-label feasibility trial of transdermal cannabidiol for hand osteoarthritis

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is an irreversible degenerative condition causing chronic pain and impaired functionality. Existing treatment options are often inadequate. Cannabidiol (CBD) has demonstrated analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects in preclinical models of arthritis. In this open-label feasibility trial, participants with symptomatically active hand OA applied a novel transdermal CBD gel (4% w/w) three times a day for four weeks to their most painful hand. Changes in daily self-reported pain scores were measured on a 0-10 Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Hand functionality was determined via daily grip strength measures using a Bluetooth equipped squeeze ball and self-report questionnaire. Quality of life (QoL) ratings around sleep, anxiety, stiffness and fatigue were also measured. All self-report measures and grip strength data were gathered via smartphone application. Urinalysis was conducted at trial end to determine systemic absorption of CBD. Eighteen participants were consented and 15 completed the trial. Pain ratings were significantly reduced over time from pre-treatment baseline including current pain (- 1.91 ± 0.35, p < 0.0001), average pain (- 1.92 ± 0.35, p < 0.0001) and maximum pain (- 1.97 ± 0.34, p < 0.0001) (data represent mean reduction on a 0-10 NPRS scale ± standard error of the mean (SEM)). A significant increase in grip strength in the treated hand (p < 0.0001) was observed although self-reported functionality did not improve. There were significant (p < 0.005) improvements in three QoL measures: fatigue, stiffness and anxiety. CBD and its metabolites were detected at low concentrations in all urine samples. Measured reductions in pain and increases in grip strength seen during treatment reverted back towards baseline during the washout phase. In summary, pain, grip strength and QoL measures, using smartphone technology, was shown to improve over time following transdermal CBD application suggesting feasibility of this intervention in relieving osteoarthritic hand pain. Proof of efficacy, however, requires further confirmation in a placebo-controlled randomised trial.Trial registration: ANZCTR public trials registry (ACTRN12621001512819, 05/11/2021).

A systematic review on the effects of non-pharmacological interventions for fatigue among people with upper and/or lower limb osteoarthritis

Objectives

To identify non-pharmacological fatigue interventions and determine the effectiveness of these non-pharmacological interventions in reducing fatigue immediately and over time in OA.

Methods

A review protocol (CRD42020163730) was developed and registered with the PROSPERO database. Included studies comprised peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effects of conservative interventions on fatigue in people with upper and lower limb OA. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias (ROB-2) was used to assess the quality of evidence of studies. Narrative synthesis was used to summarize the effectiveness of identified fatigue interventions.

Results

Out of 2644 citations identified from databases, 32 reports were included after screening for titles, abstracts and full texts. Of these reports, 30 parallel RCTs, one cluster and one cross-over RCT were included. 13 RCTs were of low ROB, 6 had some concerns and 13 had high ROB. The narrative synthesis identified interventions for fatigue including exercise, activity pacing, cognitive behavioural therapy, telerehabilitation and complementary alternative therapies. Exercise interventions showed the most significant beneficial effects on fatigue.

Conclusions

Diverse interventions for fatigue management among individuals with upper and lower limb OA were identified. Of these, exercise interventions appear to be the most promising with the majority of these interventions favouring fatigue improvement. While cognitive behavioural therapy has limited evidence of beneficial effects, there is insufficient evidence regarding the effectiveness of other identified interventions, including complementary and alternative therapies, and telerehabilitation.

Impact of Prevention Strategies on Quality of Life in Patients with Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of prevention strategies on the quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) through a comprehensive analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in multiple electronic databases, including Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov, up to June 10th, 2023. Eligible studies were RCTs assessing the effectiveness of prevention strategies in adult patients diagnosed with OA, with validated instruments used to measure quality of life outcomes. A total of 10 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The analyzed prevention strategies encompassed enhanced exercise, education, or a combination of both. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

The pooled results revealed a significant improvement in the quality of life of OA patients who underwent enhanced exercise or education compared to control groups (standardized mean difference = 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.8). However, the overall quality of evidence was graded as low according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides evidence that prevention strategies, particularly enhanced exercise or education, have a positive impact on the quality of life in patients with OA. Despite the observed benefits, the overall quality of evidence is limited, highlighting the need for larger, well-designed trials to strengthen the evidence base. These findings underscore the importance of implementing effective prevention strategies in the management of OA to improve patient outcomes and enhance their quality of life. Further research is warranted to optimize the selection and implementation of prevention strategies for OA patients.

Effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions on function and occupational performance among adults with conditions of the hand, wrist, and forearm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions for adults with conservatively managed conditions of the hand, wrist, and forearm.

METHODS

Searches were carried out in CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, and PubMed. Grey literature was searched for via Google Scholar. A systematic literature search was undertaken for randomised studies that examined occupational therapy interventions for treatment of hand, wrist, and forearm conditions. The primary outcome was function, with secondary outcomes of occupational performance, satisfaction with occupational performance, pain, and quality of life. Meta-analyses were completed, and GRADE was used to determine the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Twelve studies with 1429 participants were identified. Interventions included combinations of occupation-based intervention, assistive device provision, education, orthosis provision, and exercise programmes for arthritis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and fracture and tendon injuries of the hand, wrist, and forearm. Occupational therapy resulted in an improvement of function (REM, SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.00 to -0.53, I2  = 69%, low certainty evidence) (p = 0.05), occupational performance (REM, SMD 0.83, 95% CI 1.61-0.06, I2  = 91%, low certainty evidence) (p = 0.04), satisfaction with occupational performance (REM, SMD 0.74, 95% CI 1.42-0.05, I2  = 89%, low certainty evidence) (p = 0.03), and pain reduction (FEM, MD -1.35, 95% CI -0.84 to -1.86, I2  = 0%, moderate certainty evidence) (p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Further high-quality research is recommended to determine the effects of occupational therapy interventions on specific upper limb conditions, inclusive of a broader range of clinical and patient reported outcome measures.

The effectiveness of exercise and physical activity programs on fatigue and sleep in people with arthritis - A systematic review with meta-analysis

This systematic review aimed to systematically investigate the literature on the effectiveness of exercise and physical activity programs on fatigue and sleep in people with arthritis. For that, seven databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials. After the searches, 36 studies investigating 2281 participants were included. Risk of bias assessments were done by two independent reviewers using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to judge the certainty of evidence. The evidence on benefits of exercise and physical activity programs on fatigue and sleep parameters in people with osteoarthritis and psoriatic arthritis was either lacking or inconclusive. There was very low to low certainty evidence for a slight benefit of exercise and physical activity programs on fatigue at short-term in people with ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatoid arthritis. However, the evidence was very uncertain for the medium- and long-term as well as for any sleep parameters. The results indicate that exercise and physical activity programs may offer some benefits on fatigue for people with arthritis in the short-term, although the best type of exercise remains uncertain. The available evidence on improvements in sleep was insufficient to draw strong conclusions.

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

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized, interventional trial with 1 year follow-up.

INTRODUCTION

Though recommended, evidence is lacking to support specific exercises to stabilize and strengthen the first carpometacarpal (CMC) joint for cases of osteoarthritis (OA).

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To determine in a naturalistic setting, whether standard treatment plus a home exercise program (ST+HEP) is more effective than standard treatment (ST) alone in improving Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (qDASH) scores, and secondarily, in other patient-centered (pain, function) and clinical outcomes (range of motion, strength).

METHODS

A total of 190 patients from a hand therapy practice in northwestern PA were enrolled by informed consent and randomized into ST or ST+HEP groups. Average age was 60 years, most were female (78%) with sedentary occupations most common (36%). ST group received orthotic interventions, modalities, joint protection education and adaptive equipment recommendations, while the ST+HEP group received a home exercise program in addition to ST for 6-12 months. Follow-up occurred at 3, 6, and 12 months. Outcomes included grip strength, pinch strength, range of motion (ROM), qDASH, Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) and pain ratings. At the 6 month mark, all subjects could change groups if desired. Efficacy data analysis included both parametric and non-parametric tests. The threshold for statistical significance was 0.05 and adjusted for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Repeated measures ANOVA failed to show a statistically significant difference in strength and ROM assessments between treatment groups over the 12 month follow-up (P ≥ .398). Differences between groups did not exceed 13%. Both the ST and ST+HEP groups evidenced improvement over time in most patient-focused assessments (P ≤ .011), including improvements exceeding reported clinically important differences in pain with activity and PSFS scores. Scores for these measures were similar at each follow-up period (P ≥ .080) in each group. The presence of CTS exerted no effect on outcomes; longer treatment time was weakly related to poorer qDASH and PSFS scores initially. Of those enrolled, 48% of subjects completed the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of a high-frequency home exercise program did not improve clinical or patient-centered outcomes more so than standard care in our sample however, study limitations are numerous. Both groups had decreased pain with activity and improved PSFS scores, meeting the established minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of each at 6 and 12 months. Adherence with the home program was poor and/or unknown.

The effects of a mobile app-delivered intervention in people with symptomatic hand osteoarthritis: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Exercise therapy, self-management and education are recommended interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA), but new delivery systems are needed to solve lack of adherence.

AIM

To determine the effects on hand function and pain related measures of a mobile app-delivered intervention, compared with usual care, in patients with symptomatic hand OA.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicenter, two-group parallel randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Community health centers in rural southern Spain.

POPULATION

Eighty-three participants with unilateral or bilateral symptomatic hand OA were proposed to participate, and finally 74 were included and randomized.

METHODS

Participants received a home multimodal treatment (exercise, education, and self-management recommendations) with the CareHand mobile app or usual care (written exercises) over 12 weeks. Monthly telephone calls were performed to monitor adherence. The primary outcome was hand physical function (Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index, AUSCAN) at 3- and 6-months. Secondary measures included hand pain intensity and morning stiffness, upper limb function, hand dexterity, and grip and pinch strength.

RESULTS

The CareHand group showed significant within-group changes in hand function at 6-months (-3.0, 95% CI -5.1 to -0.9 vs. usual care: -0.9, 95% CI -3.3 to 1.5). Neither group showed improvements in hand function at 3-months (CareHand: -1.5, 95% CI -3.1 to 0.1; usual care: -0.5, 95% CI -2.7 to 1.7). For the secondary outcomes, the CareHand group showed better results on upper limb function both at 3- and 6-months, and on pain both at 1- and 3-months compared to usual care group. Linear regression models indicated that baseline scores of pain intensity, hand status, and upper limb function were associated with a greater improvement in hand pain and physical function.

CONCLUSIONS

A mobile app-delivered intervention is effective for improving hand function, and better than usual care for upper limb function and pain. Further research is warranted to understand the impact of mobile health (mHealth) in people with hand OA.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

mHealth interventions are a feasible and secure multimodal delivery approach in older adults with hand OA in rural primary care setting. Baseline pain and upper limb function might predict functional hand outcomes.

Development of a prediction model to determine responders to conservative treatment in people with symptomatic hand osteoarthritis: A secondary analysis of a single-centre, randomised feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Conservative treatments are beneficial for people with hand osteoarthritis (OA).

OBJECTIVE

It was the purpose of this study to develop and internally validate both a basic model and a more complex model that could predict responders to conservative treatments in people with hand OA.

DESIGN

This was a secondary analysis of a single-centre, randomised feasibility study.

METHODS

Fifty-nine participants (34 responders) with hand osteoarthritis were recruited from the general population. Participants were randomised to receive either advice alone, or advice in combination with blood flow restriction training (BFRT), or traditional high intensity training (HIT). Participants underwent supervised hand exercises three times per week for six weeks. The OMERACT-OARSI criteria were utilised to determine responders vs non responders to treatment at the end of six weeks. A basic logistic regression model (treatment type, expectations, adherence) and a more complex logistic regression model (basic model variables plus pain catastrophising and neuropathic pain features) were created. Discrimination ability, and calibration were assessed. Internal model validation through bootstrapping (200 repetitions) was utilised to calculate the prediction model optimism.

RESULTS

The results showed that the basic model presented with acceptable discrimination (optimism corrected c-statistic: 0.72, 95% CI 0.71-0.73) and calibration (slope = 1.41; intercept = 0.68). The more complex model had better discrimination but poorer calibration.

CONCLUSION

A prediction tool was created to provide an individualised estimate of treatment response in people with hand OA. Future studies will need to validate this model in other groups of patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.anzctr.org.au/- ACTRN12617001270303.

Digital rehabilitation for hand and wrist pain: a single-arm prospective longitudinal cohort study

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

This study supports that a fully remote digital care program is feasible and able to promote high patient engagement in the telerehabilitation of patients with wrist and hand pain.

Introduction:

Wrist and hand represent the third most common body part in work-related injuries, being associated with long-term absenteeism. Telerehabilitation can promote access to treatment, patient adherence, and engagement, while reducing health care–related costs.

Objective:

Report the results of a fully remote digital care program (DCP) for wrist and hand pain (WP).

Methods:

A single-arm interventional study was conducted on individuals with WP applying for a DCP. Primary outcome was the mean change in the Numerical Pain Rating Scale after 8 weeks (considering a minimum clinically important change of 30%). Secondary outcomes were: disability (Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire), analgesic intake, surgery intention, mental health (patient health questionnaire [PHQ-9] and generalized anxiety disorder [GAD-7]), fear-avoidance beliefs (FABQ-PA), work productivity and activity impairment, and engagement.

Results:

From 189 individuals starting the DCP, 149 (78.8%) completed the intervention. A significant pain improvement was observed (51.3% reduction (2.26, 95% CI 1.73; 2.78)) and 70.4% of participants surpassing minimum clinically important change. This change correlated with improvements in disability (52.1%), FABQ-PA (32.2%), and activities impairment recovery (65.4%). Improvements were also observed in other domains: surgery intent (76.1%), mental health (67.0% in anxiety and 72.7% in depression), and overall productivity losses (68.2%). Analgesic intake decreased from 22.5% to 7.1%. Mean patient satisfaction score was 8.5/10.0 (SD 1.8).

Conclusions:

These findings support the feasibility and utility of a fully remote DCP for patients with WP. Clinically significant improvements were observed in all health-related and productivity-related outcomes, alongside very high patient adherence rates and satisfaction. This study strengthens that management of WP is possible through a remote DCP, decreasing access barriers and potentially easing health care expenditure.

Effectiveness of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation therapy and strength training among post-menopausal women with thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. A randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis (CMC OA) greatly affects post-menopausal women. It is characterized by pain and functional deficits that limit the performance of activities of daily life and affect quality of life.

PURPOSE

Analyze the effects of 4/weeks strength training, with and without proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) on the disability among post-menopausal women with thumb CMC OA. Secondly, analyze the effects on pain, mobility, and strength.

STUDY DESIGN

Superiority randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

42 women were randomly allocated to strength training program (SEG, n = 21) and to a strength training plus PNF therapy program (PNFG, n = 21). The Disability (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire), pain (visual analogue scale), mobility (Kapandji Test), and hand strength were evaluated pre, post intervention (at 4 weeks) and follow-up (at 8 weeks).

RESULTS

Disability was significantly reduced in both groups after intervention, but reduction was statistically superior in PNFG (between-group mean difference [MD] = -16.69 points; CI = -21.56:-11.82; P<.001; d = 2.14). Similar results were observed for secondary outcomes: pain (MD = -2.03; CI = -2.83:-1.22; P<.001; d = 1.58), mobility (MD = 0.96; CI = 0.52:1.38; P<.001; d = 1.40) and strength (grip: MD = 3.47kg; CI = 1.25:5.69; P = .003; d = 0.97, palmar: MD = 0.97kg; CI = 0.14:1.80; P = .024; d = 0.72, tip: MD = 1.12kg; CI = 0.41:1.83; P = .003; d = 0.99 and key pinch: MD = 0.85kg; CI = 0.001:1.70; P = .049; d = 0.62). These improvements were maintained at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of PNF exercises and strength training is more effective for reducing disability pain and improve mobility and strength in post-menopausal women with CMC OA than a programme based solely on strength.

Comparison of the effectiveness of peloid and paraffin treatment for symptomatic hand osteoarthritis in women: a single-blind randomized controlled study

Although peloid and paraffin treatments may have a positive effect in the short term on pain, functional status, hand grip strength, and quality of life in patients with hand osteoarthritis (HOA), there are no comprehensive and comparative studies of these therapies for HOA. The aim of our study was to evaluate the short-term effects of peloid and paraffin treatments in symptomatic HOA patients. Eighty female patients diagnosed with HOA were randomly divided into two equal groups: peloid group (peloid therapy and home exercise) and paraffin group (paraffin therapy and home exercise). Peloid and paraffin applications were performed over 3 weeks for a total of 15 sessions. Patients were evaluated with visual analog scale (VAS)-rest, -activity, and -handgrip for pain, Jamar hand dynamometer for grip strength, Australian/Canadian (AUSCAN) Osteoarthritis Hand Index for function, health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) for physical activity, Beck depression inventory (BDI) for depression, and short form-36 (SF-36) for quality of life. Evaluations were performed before treatment, in the 3rd week, and 1 month after treatment. For all parameters except SF-36, statistically significant improvements were observed in short-term evaluations compared to the baseline in both groups (p = .000). Reductions in HAQ scores in the 3rd week and 1st month (p = .001 and p = .003), and the decrease in BDI scores in the 3rd week (p = .005) was statistically significantly higher in the peloid group. Improvements in some subparameters of the SF-36 were statistically significant in favor of the peloid group. In female patients with HOA, both groups experienced similar positive effects on pain, functional status, and hand grip strength for up to one month, but the peloid group was found to be superior in the short term in terms of physical activity and some quality of life parameters. Peloid therapy can be preferred as a natural and reliable method for symptomatic HOA.

The management of hand osteoarthritis: The rheumatologist's perspective

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is treated by several medical professionals. In this review the rheumatologist's perspective will be conveyed. The rheumatologist tasks are to diagnose hand OA, exclude other causes of patient's complaints, and provide treatment. The rheumatologist therefore has a distinctive and important role in hand OA treatment. Although no disease modifying treatment exists, there are multiple options for managing hand OA in rheumatology practice, with the goal of achieving symptom relief and optimizing hand function. These treatments can be non-pharmacological or pharmacological. In this review we will provide a summary of evidence-based management options based on existing guidelines. Furthermore, we will describe common practice among rheumatologists for hand OA management. In order to do so, we performed a literature review of studies addressing treatment modality usage for hand OA. The review comprised 25 studies, which were heterogeneous in terms of treatment modality usage. In addition, a detailed description of care usage by patients in a Rheumatology outpatient clinic is given, based on data of our Hand OSTeoArthritis in Secondary care primary hand OA cohort. The large majority of these patients used any form of hand OA treatment (83%). Non-pharmacological treatment was less frequently used (47%) than pharmacological treatment (77%).

High baseline pain is associated with treatment adherence in persons diagnosed with thumb base osteoarthritis: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Thumb osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling condition. Adherence to prescribed conservative interventions may affect outcomes of thumb OA trials.

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to determine whether baseline pain and hand function is associated with treatment adherence over 12 weeks in participants with thumb base OA.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational cohort study nested within a randomized-controlled trial.

METHODS

Ninety-four participants from the intervention group were included in the analysis. Baseline pain and function were assessed using a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale and the Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis questionnaire (0-30), respectively. Participants received a combination of treatments including education, orthosis, hand exercises, and topical anti-inflammatory gel. Adherence was measured using a daily self-reported diary. Participants were classified as non-adherent, partially adherent or fully adherent if they completed none, 1 and/or 2 or all 3 of the interventions as prescribed. Ordinal logistic regression modelling was performed.

RESULTS

At 12-week follow-up, half of the participants were fully adherent to the treatments (n = 46, 48.9%), 30.9% of participants were partially adherent (n = 29) and 20.2% were non-adherent (n = 19, 20.2%). High baseline pain was a significantly associated with better adherence in the unadjusted model [OR = 3.15, 95% CI (1.18, 8.42)] and adjusted model [OR = 3.20, 95% CI (1.13, 8.20)]. Baseline function was not associated with adherence [OR = 1.03, 95% CI (0.47, 2.23)].

CONCLUSION

High baseline pain was associated with better adherence in participants with thumb base OA. Higher baseline functional impairment was not associated with better adherence.

Six weeks of resistance training (plus advice) vs advice only in hand osteoarthritis: A single-blind, randomised, controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

People with hand osteoarthritis (OA) may benefit from resistance training interventions. To date the feasibility of a such interventions for symptomatic hand OA, as per international guidelines, is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the feasibility of a clinical trial comparing resistance training to an advice only control group in people with symptomatic hand OA.

DESIGN

Single-blind, randomised, controlled feasibility study.

METHODS

The American College of Rheumatology criteria for hand OA were utilised for inclusion. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to advice and blood flow restriction training (BFRT), advice and traditional high intensity training (HIT), or advice only (control). Participants receiving BFRT and HIT underwent supervised hand exercises three times a week for six weeks. Feasibility measures included recruitment rate, adherence, exercise induced pain, training acceptability, pain flares, and adverse events. Number of treatment responders, pain, grip strength, and hand function were also recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 191 participants were screened, 59 (31%) were included. Retention rate was 89% for BFRT and 79% for HIT. Exercise did not worsen pain following training sessions, and training acceptability was equal between groups. Pain flares occurred in 1.6% (BFRT) and 4% (HIT) out of all the training sessions. There was one adverse event in the HIT group, with the participants withdrawing from the study due to pain. The number of treatment responders, and improvements in pain, were greater with BFRT and HIT. Grip and function did not improve.

CONCLUSION

A clinical trial comparing resistance training to advice for people with symptomatic hand OA is feasible.

Intervention reporting and dissemination of information for the management of hand osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION

A variety of exercise programs are recognized to be effective for the management of hand osteoarthritis (HOA). It is important to report the essential elements of these exercise programs for clinicians to replicate properly and facilitate their implementation with individuals who suffers from HOA, especially if they are found to be effective programs.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The objective of this article was to assess content reporting using three exercise reporting standardized assessment tools among exercise interventions randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving individuals with HOA.

STUDY DESIGN

A descriptive study was used.

METHODS

Two pairs of trained assessors independently identified, selected, and scored the reporting quality of the exercise programs of RCTs on the management of HOA using three standardized assessment tools: the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist, Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to review the quality of reporting of 11 RCTs included in a recent Ottawa Panel guideline.

RESULTS

Based on consensus reached by two different pairs of reviewers and an arbitrator, the mean total scores for the 11 included exercise programs were reported as follows: the mean total score for the CERT, CONTENT, and TIDieR was 10.58/19 ± 4.34, 3.27/9 ± 1.90, and 5.92/12 ± 2.54, respectively. The overall Pearson's Correlation (r) between the methodological quality and intervention reporting was 0.86, 0.71, and 0.54 for moderate-to-high RCTs and 0.47, 0.79, and 0.42 for fair-to-poor methodological quality for the CERT checklist, CONTENT scale, and TIDieR checklist, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention reporting in the management of HOA is poor among low-, moderate-, and high-quality clinical trials. The least reported information was intervention parameters related to behavior change. Improving reporting is recommended to ensure replication of effective exercise programs to enhance quality of life of individuals with HOA.

Comparison of efficacy of fluidotherapy and paraffin bath in hand osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial

Objectives

This study aims to compare the efficacy of paraffin bath therapy and fluidotherapy on pain, hand muscle strength, functional status, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with hand osteoarthritis (OA).

Patients and methods

This prospective randomized controlled study included 77 patients (8 males, 69 females; mean age: 63.1±10.3 years; range 39 to 88 years) with primary hand OA who applied between July 2017 and March 2018. The patients were randomized into two groups with the sealed envelope method: Paraffin bath therapy (20 min, one session per day, for two weeks) was applied for 36 patients whereas 41 patients received fluidotherapy for the same period. The pain severity of the patients, both at rest and during activities of daily living (ADL) within the last 48 hours was questioned and scored using Visual Analog Scale. Duruöz Hand Index (DHI) was used to evaluate hand functions. Gross grip strength was measured using Jamar dynamometer whereas fine grip strength was measured using pinch meter in three different positions (lateral pinch, tip pinch, and palmar pinch). The 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) was used to analyze the QoL. All measurements were performed before, immediately after, and three months after treatment.

Results

Improvement was observed in pain score at rest and during ADL, DHI scores, gross and fine grip strengths, and SF-36 subscores in both groups after treatment. However, no significant difference was observed between the groups.

Conclusion

Both fluidotherapy and paraffin bath therapy have been found to have positive effects on pain, hand muscle strength, functional status, and QoL in the treatment of hand OA. However, no superiority was observed between the two treatment modalities.

Effects of a progressive resistance exercise program in patients with hand osteoarthritis: A randomized, controlled trial with a blinded assessor

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of a progressive resistance strength program on pain, function and strength in hand osteoarthritis patients.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS

Outpatients, University Hospital.

SUBJECTS

Sixty hand osteoarthritis patients were randomly allocated to exercise group (n = 30) or control group (n = 30).

INTERVENTION

The exercise group performed a progressive resistance strength program for hand muscles over 12 weeks. Both groups had a single education session.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was pain intensity (numeric pain scale). The secondary outcomes were - AUSCAN Hand Osteoarthritis Index, Cochin Hand Functional Scale for function and grip and pinch strength. A blinded evaluator performed the evaluations at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The mean age were 68.9 (8.8) and 64.7 (8.9) for control and exercise groups, respectively. No significant differences between-group was observed for pain after 12 weeks (mean difference between groups was -1.30 (-0.02 to 2.62) for dominant hand and -1.33 (0.01-2.65) for non-dominant hand at T12, with P = 0.085 and 0.295, respectively). Regarding secondary outcomes, statistically significant differences between groups were found in exercise group: AUSCAN index - total score (P = 0.005), pain (P = 0.006), function (P = 0.047), and Cochin scale (P = 0.042) with the following mean difference between groups: -9.9 (4.07-15.73), -3.26 (1.06-5.46), -5.03 (1.20-8.86), and -6.27 (0.18-12.36), respectively.

CONCLUSION

No difference was observed for pain (numerical pain scale) after the progressive resistance exercise program performed, however in exercise group, an improvement was observed on secondary outcomes such as pain during activities and function for patients with hand osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1b.

Hand Erosive Osteoarthritis and Distal Interphalangeal Involvement in Psoriatic Arthritis: The Place of Conservative Therapy

Hand erosive osteoarthritis (HEOA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) with DIP involvement are common diseases affecting the hand. Both of them evolve with a progressive limitation in grip due to limited range of motion of the affected joints and stenosing tenosynovitis. Pharmacological options currently available (corticosteroids and clodronate or Idrossicloroquine) for the treatment of EHOA are mostly symptomatic and currently there are no effective drugs able to modify the course of the disease. In addition, data on drug effectiveness of PsA with DIP involvement are lacking. Conservative therapy should be considered in order to reduce pain and improve hand functionality. There are many studies debating a wide range of non-pharmacological intervention in the management of HEOA: joint protection program, range of motion and strengthening exercise, hand exercise with electromagnetic therapy, application of heat with paraffin wax or balneotherapy, occupational therapy and education. Concerning conservative treatment strategies to treat PsA, on the contrary, current evidence is still weak. Further research is needed to find the correct place of physical therapy to prevent stiffness and ankylosis due to the vicious circle of inflammation-pain-immobility-rigidity.

The effects of an 8-week knitting program on osteoarthritis symptoms in elderly women: A pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Exercise therapy is effective in reducing symptoms and disability associated with hand osteoarthritis (HOA) but often has low adherence. An intervention consisting in a meaningful occupation, such as knitting, may improve adherence to treatment. This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) studied the adherence and clinical effectiveness of a knitting program in older females suffering from HOA to evaluate the acceptability of this intervention and assess the feasibility of a larger-scale RCT.

METHODS

Single-blind, two-arm pilot RCT with a parallel group design with 37 participants (18 control, 19 intervention). Control participants were given an educational pamphlet and assigned to a waiting list. The knitting program (8-week duration) had two components: bi-weekly 20-min group knitting sessions and daily 20-min home knitting session on the 5 remaining weekdays. Measures included knitting adherence (implementation outcomes) as well as stiffness, pain, functional status, hand physical activity level, patient's global impression of change, health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, and grip strength (clinical outcomes measured throughout the 8-week program and 4 weeks after the intervention).

RESULTS

Our protocol is feasible and the intervention was acceptable and enjoyable for participants, who showed high adherence. No difference was observed between the two groups for any of the clinical outcome measures (all p > .05).

CONCLUSION

Knitting is a safe and accessible activity for older women with HOA. However, our 8-week knitting program did not result in improvements in any of our outcome measures. Knitting for a longer period and/or with higher frequency may yield better outcomes.

Choice of control group treatments in hand osteoarthritis trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess how patient characteristics and study design influence the effectiveness of control interventions in hand OA trials.

METHODS

The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020163473). Two authors independently searched four electronic databases from their inception to December 31, 2019. Randomized and non-randomized controlled hand OA trials were included if pain intensity was assessed using a validated scale. We allocated control groups into one of the following: placebo, add-on treatment, no treatment, or active treatment. The standardized mean differences (d) of pain, as well as subjective function and hand strength, were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and 90% prediction intervals using random-effects models. Meta-regression and post-hoc subgroup analyses were performed to investigate which factors potentially impacted placebo analgesia and between-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty-one placebo, 11 add-on, 12 no-treatment, and 10 active-treatment controls were included in meta-analyses. Effective pain relief was observed in placebo (d = -0.50, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.37), add-on (d = -0.35, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.12), and active-treatment (d = -0.92, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.48) groups. In subjective function, these treatments had smaller but beneficial effects; hand strength, contrastingly, was not improved. Placebo effects were larger when flare designs were used (d = -0.96) and more homogeneous when minimum pain thresholds were set (d = -0.46, 90% prediction intervals -0.79 to -0.14).

CONCLUSION

Placebo, add-on, and active control treatments were more effective than the no treatment control in relieving hand pain and improving subjective function. By choosing minimum pain thresholds and flare requirements at patient enrollment, moderate pain relief may be replicated among control participants in future randomized placebo-controlled trials.

Task shifting in the care for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Protocol for a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

Background

Current health policy states that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) should mainly be managed in primary health care. Still, research shows that patients with hand OA have poor access to recommended treatment in primary care, and in Norway, they are increasingly referred to rheumatologist consultations in specialist care. In this randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, we will test if a new model, where patients referred to consultation in specialist health care receive their first consultation by an occupational therapy (OT) specialist, is as safe and effective as the traditional model, where they receive their first consultation by a rheumatologist. More specifically, we will answer the following questions:

What are the characteristics of patients with hand OA referred to specialist health care with regards to joint affection, disease activity, symptoms and function?

Is OT-led hand OA care as effective and safe as rheumatologist-led care with respect to treatment response, disease activity, symptoms, function and patient satisfaction?

Is OT-led hand OA care equal to, or more cost effective than rheumatologist-led care?

Which factors, regardless of hand OA care, predict improvement 6 and 12 months after baseline?

Methods

Participants will be patients with hand OA diagnosed by a general practitioner and referred for consultation at one of two Norwegian departments of rheumatology. Those who agree will attend a clinical assessment and report their symptoms and function in validated outcome measures, before they are randomly selected to receive their first consultation by an OT specialist (n = 200) or by a rheumatologist (n = 200). OTs may refer patients to a rheumatologist consultation and vice versa. The primary outcome will be the number of patients classified as OMERACT/OARSI-responders after six months. Secondary outcomes are pain, function and satisfaction with care over the twelve-month trial period. The analysis of the primary outcome will be done by logistic regression. A two-sided 95% confidence interval for the difference in response probability will be formed, and non-inferiority of OT-led care will be claimed if the upper endpoint of this interval does not exceed 15%.

Discussion

The findings will improve access to evidence-based management of people with hand OA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03102788. Registered April 6th, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03102788?term=Kjeken&draw=2&rank=1

Date and version identifier:

December 17th, 2020. First version.

Barriers, facilitators, preferences and expectations of joint protection programmes for patients with hand arthritis: a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this survey was to investigate the barriers, facilitators, expectations and patient preferences regarding joint protection (JP) programmes in people with hand arthritis.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Tertiary clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with hand arthritis: osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and other forms of arthritis.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

This study used a survey among people with hand arthritis. Descriptive statistics and percentages were reported for all the data about the barriers, facilitators and preferences around JP.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients consented to participate. Most of the patients (82%) were unaware of JP. Factors that may act as barriers to participation and were regarded as 'a very big concern' were: cost of the programme (44%), time of offering the programme (39%), work commitments (36%) and having a centre/clinic close to the house (28%). Factors that may act as facilitators and rated as 'extremely helpful' were: research that shows that JP works (26%) and having the centre/clinic close to the house (25%). An online format for JP was the most preferred option (54%). Half (46%) preferred a timeframe of 1 hour, three times per week and 44% preferred a 2-hour programme, for three times per week.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of the potential benefits of JP, and prior experience with JP programme were very low. Common potentially modifiable patient-reported barriers to participate in future JP interventions, included: cost, work commitments, distance from home to clinic and times that the intervention were provided. These barriers might be addressed with free and accessible forms of delivery of JP, which may lead to better uptake and participation in JP programmes.

Do behaviour change techniques increase adherence to home exercises in those with upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether behaviour change techniques (BCTs) can influence adherence to home exercise in people with upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders (UEMD).

DESIGN

A systematic review of randomised control trials, non-randomised control trials, case-control studies and cohort studies. Results were presented narratively. Participants were those with UEMD. The intervention was any home exercise programme, alongside a BCT designed to increase exercise adherence. Any duration of intervention was accepted. The main outcome sought was adherence to home exercise. A systematic search was performed on four online databases. Grey literature was searched.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 28,755 titles. 77 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Six studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Four studies had Some Concern of Bias, whilst two studies had High Risk of Bias. Three studies found statistically significant differences in exercise adherence (p < 0.05) between the Intervention group and Control group. The BCT 'Social Support (unspecified)' was used within all studies that found significant differences in adherence levels at outcome. However, multiple BCTs were received by the Intervention groups within all studies, making it impossible to identify the effects of any single BCT upon adherence levels.

CONCLUSION

Social support may be relevant in patients' adherence levels to HEPs. However, confidence in the results is uncertain given the small number of studies found, and their High RoB. Future studies should validate their measurement and definition of adherence, as well as the number of BCTs they use, to provide reproducible evidence.

Short-term effects of occupational therapy on hand function and pain in patients with carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: secondary analyses from a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the short-term effects of multimodal occupational therapy on pain and hand function in patients referred for surgical consultation due to carpometacarpal joint (CMC1) osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, CMC1 OA patients referred for surgical consultation at three rheumatology departments were randomized to 3 months multimodal occupational therapy (including patient education, hand exercises, orthoses, and assistive devices) or usual treatment (OA information). Pain was measured on a numeric rating scale from 0-10 (0, no pain). Function included grip and pinch strength (Newtons), range-of-motion [palmar and CMC1 abduction (°); flexion deficit in digits 2-5 (mm)], and self-reported Measure of Activity Performance of the Hand (MAP-Hand; range: 1-4; 1, no activity limitation) and QuickDASH (range: 0-100; 0, no disability). Between-group difference was assessed with follow-up values as dependent variables and group as an independent variable, adjusted for baseline values and time to follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 180 patients (mean age 63 (SD 8) years; 81% women), 170 completed the short-term follow-up assessment (3-4 months after baseline). Compared to usual treatment, occupational therapy yielded significantly improved pain at rest (-1.4 [-0.7, -2.0], P < 0.001), pain following grip strength (-1.1 [-0.5, -1.7], P = 0.001), grip strength (23.4 [7.5, 39.3], P = 0.004), MAP-Hand (-0.18 [-0.09, -0.28], P = 0.001), and QuickDASH (-8.1 [-4.6, -11.5], P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The multimodal occupational therapy intervention had significant short-term effects on pain, grip strength, and hand function in patients with CMC1 OA.

Conservative therapeutic interventions for osteoarthritic finger joints: A systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

INTRODUCTION

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic and disabling disease causing pain and functional limitations in approximately 54%-67% of the adult population aged 55 years and older.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the study is to evaluate the evidence supporting conservative therapeutic interventions for the treatment of OA finger joints.

METHODS

Eighteen studies dated between 1979 and 2016 were identified meeting the inclusion criteria. They were analyzed based on Structured Effectiveness for Quality Evaluation of a Study, level of evidence, and effect size.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence varies in quality and effect sizes but generally supports the use of active range of motion and resistive exercises, joint protection, electromagnetic therapy, paraffin wax, and balneotherapy (combined and/or not combined with mud packs and magnetotherapy), and distal interphalangeal orthoses as effective treatment interventions for individuals with OA finger joints.

Linking commonly used hand therapy outcome measures to individual areas of the International Classification of Functioning: A systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

INTRODUCTION

Identifying outcome measures that correspond to the International Classification of Functioning (ICF) provides insight into selecting appropriate outcome tools in hand therapy practice.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The objective of this study is to systematically review patient-reported outcome measures commonly used in hand therapy to determine the extent to which the content represents the biopsychosocial view of the ICF.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted. Studies that met inclusion criteria were identified, and outcome measures were extracted. The meaningful concept was determined for each item on the measure and linked to the most specific ICF category. Summary linkage calculations were completed.

RESULTS

Eleven patient-reported outcomes were identified from 43 included studies. Activity and participation had the highest content coverage followed by body functions. There was linking to personal factors and not defined-disability and mental health. Environmental factors were not represented in any of the included outcome measures. The core set representation of unique codes ranged from 8.55% to 18.80% (mean: 11.97%) for the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Hand Conditions and from 30.43% to 47.83% (mean: 31.40%) for the Brief ICF Core Set for Hand Conditions. The percent representation of the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Hand Conditions for unique disability ranged from 21.62% to 43.24% (mean: 20.33%) and from 62.50% to 87.50% (mean: 72.22%) for the Brief ICF Core Set for Hand Conditions.

DISCUSSION

None of the included measures represent all categories of the ICF Core Sets for Hand Conditions.

CONCLUSION

Utilizing the most recent refinement rules for the linking process, this study provides comparisons of measures along with clarity of content coverage for the most commonly used tools in the practice of hand therapy.

Does occupational therapy delay or reduce the proportion of patients that receives thumb carpometacarpal joint surgery? A multicentre randomised controlled trial

Objectives

To evaluate whether occupational therapy, provided in the period between referral and surgical consultation, might delay or reduce the need of surgery in thumb carpometacarpal joint (CMCJ) osteoarthritis and to explore predictors for CMCJ surgery.

Methods

This multicentre randomised controlled trial included patients referred for surgical consultation due to CMCJ osteoarthritis. An occupational therapy group received hand osteoarthritis education, assistive devices, CMCJ orthoses and exercises. A control group received only hand osteoarthritis information. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients that had received CMCJ surgery after 2 years. We examined the primary outcome and predictors for surgery with regression models, and time to surgery with the log-rank test and cox regression analyses.

Results

Of 221 patients screened for eligibility, 180 were randomised. Information on the primary outcome was collected from medical records for all included patients. Surgery was performed on 22 patients (24%) that had received occupational therapy and 29 (32%) control patients (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.21; p=0.14). Median time to surgery was 350 days (IQR 210-540) in the occupational therapy group and 296 days (IQR 188-428) in the control group (p=0.13). Previous non-pharmacological treatment (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.14 to 6.50) and higher motivation for surgery (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.43) were significant predictors for CMCJ surgery.

Conclusions

Occupational therapy showed a small non-significant tendency to delay and reduce the need for surgery in CMCJ osteoarthritis. Previous non-pharmacological treatment and higher motivation for surgery were significant predictors for surgery.

Hand osteoarthritis: clinical phenotypes, molecular mechanisms and disease management

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent condition, and the hand is the most commonly affected site. Patients with hand OA frequently report symptoms of pain, functional limitations and frustration in undertaking everyday activities. The condition presents clinically with changes to the bone, ligaments, cartilage and synovial tissue, which can be observed using radiography, ultrasonography or MRI. Hand OA is a heterogeneous disorder and is considered to be multifactorial in aetiology. This Review provides an overview of the epidemiology, presentation and burden of hand OA, including an update on hand OA imaging (including the development of novel techniques), disease mechanisms and management. In particular, areas for which new evidence has substantially changed the way we understand, consider and treat hand OA are highlighted. For example, genetic studies, clinical trials and careful prospective imaging studies from the past 5 years are beginning to provide insights into the pathogenesis of hand OA that might uncover new therapeutic targets in the disease.

A review and synthesis of correlates of fatigue in osteoarthritis

Fatigue affects nearly half of all adults with osteoarthritis. Affected individuals report difficulty with daily functioning, requiring more time and rest during activities, feeling easily exhausted, and having to give up on social and volunteer activities known to improve quality of life. Because its etiology is poorly understood, clinical practice guidelines are unable to address management of fatigue in osteoarthritis. Elucidating a mechanism of osteoarthritis fatigue is a high priority, but few studies have identified key factors associated with fatigue in osteoarthritis. Thus, the purpose of this narrative literature review is to present the current evidence of known and potential correlates of fatigue in osteoarthritis, and synthesize our findings into a conceptual framework. The overarching goal of this work is to provide insight into areas of needed research and guide future work toward mechanistic insight of osteoarthritis fatigue. This knowledge could lead to novel nursing interventions for prevention, management, and treatment of fatigue among adults with osteoarthritis.

Exercise programs for the management of people with hand osteoarthritis: a scoping review protocol

REVIEW QUESTIONS

The review questions for this scoping review are.

Functional consultation and exercises improve grip strength in osteoarthritis of the hand - a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Evidence for non-pharmacological interventions in hand osteoarthritis is promising but still scarce. Combined interventions are most likely to best cover the clinical needs of patients with hand osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a combined, interdisciplinary intervention feasible in both primary and specialist care compared to routine care plus placebo in patients with hand OA.

METHODS

This was a randomised, controlled 2-month trial with a blinded assessor. In the combined-intervention group, rheumatology-trained health professionals from different disciplines delivered a one-session individual intervention with detailed information on functioning, activities of daily living, physical activity, nutrition, assistive devices, instructions on pain management and exercises. Telephone follow up was performed after 4 weeks. The primary outcome was grip strength after 8 weeks. Secondary outcomes were self-reported pain, satisfaction with treatment, health status, two of the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function subtests and the total score of the Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index (AUSCAN). Statistical significance was calculated by Student's t test or the Mann-Whitney U test depending on data distribution. Binominal logistic regression models were fitted, with the primary outcome being the dependent and the group allocation being the independent variable.

RESULTS

There were 151 participating patients (74 in the combined-intervention and 77 in the routine-care-plus-placebo group) with 2-month follow-up attendance of 84% (n = 128). Grip strength significantly increased in the combined-intervention group and decreased in the routine-care group (dominant hand, mean 0.03 bar (SD 0.11) versus - 0.03 (SD 0.13), p value = 0.001, baseline corrected values) after 8 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The combined one-session individual intervention significantly improved grip strength and self-reported satisfaction with treatment in patients with hand OA. It can be delivered by different rheumatology-trained health professionals and is thus also feasible in primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN62513257 . Registered on 17 May 2012.

Relationship of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale to commonly used clinical measures in hand osteoarthritis

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort correlation study.

INTRODUCTION

There is no known published research on correlations between the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), hand grip strength, and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) in a population with hand osteoarthritis (OA).

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to establish reliability of the PSFS and to evaluate the relationship between the PSFS, hand grip strength, and the DASH for a population with hand OA.

METHODS

Thirty-five participants in 4 hand clinics completed the PSFS, hand grip strength testing, and the DASH at the onset of therapy and at discharge. Eighteen participants enrolled at the primary investigator's site completed a baseline PSFS one week before the pretreatment collection with data used to establish relative and absolute reliability. Data were analyzed separately at pretreatment and posttreatment with Spearman's rho correlation (P < .05). Intraclass correlation (2, 1), standard error of the measurement, and minimum detectable change (MDC90 and MDC95) were calculated from the repeated baseline and pretreatment PSFS.

RESULTS

Intraclass correlation for PSFS was (r = 0.80) with the standard error of the measurement = 0.56, MDC90 = 1.30, and MDC95 = 1.56. Small correlation between the PSFS and DASH scores was found pretreatment (ρ = -0.10) and change scores (ρ = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

Excellent reliability with small measurement error has established clinical utility of the PSFS for the population with hand OA. These outcome measures were shown to measure different constructs and therefore should not be used interchangeably.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The Ottawa Panel guidelines on programmes involving therapeutic exercise for the management of hand osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE:

To identify programmes involving therapeutic exercise that are effective for the management of hand osteoarthritis and to provide stakeholders with updated, moderate to high-quality recommendations supporting exercises for hand osteoarthritis.

METHODS:

A systematic search and adapted selection criteria included comparable trials with exercise programmes for managing hand osteoarthritis. Based on the evaluated evidence, a panel of experts reached consensus through a Delphi approach endorsing the recommendations. A hierarchical alphabetical grading system (A, B, C+, C, C-, D-, D, D+, E, F) was based on clinical importance (≥15%) and statistical significance ( P < 0.05).

RESULTS:

Ten moderate- to high-quality studies were included. Eight studies with programmes involving therapeutic exercise (e.g. range of motion (ROM) + isotonic + isometric + functional exercise) seemed to be effective. Forty-six positive grade recommendations (i.e. A, B, C+) were obtained during short-term (<12 weeks) trials for pain, stiffness, physical function, grip strength, pinch strength, range of motion, global assessment, pressure pain threshold, fatigue and abductor pollicis longus moment and during long-term (>12 weeks) trials for physical function and pinch strength.

CONCLUSION:

Despite that many programmes involving exercise with positive recommendations for clinical outcomes are available to healthcare professionals and hand osteoarthritis patients that aid in the management of hand osteoarthritis, there is a need for further research to isolate the specific effect of exercise components.

A feasibility study of brain-targeted treatment for people with painful knee osteoarthritis in tertiary care

Purpose: To assess the feasibility and clinical impact of brain-targeted treatment (BT; aiming to target sensorimotor processing) in knee osteoarthritis patients attending tertiary care. Methods: Randomized replicated case series. The study involved three phases, each of 2 weeks duration: (1) no-treatment phase; (2) BT phase (left/right judgments and touch discrimination training); and (3) usual care (education, strengthening, and stretching training). Primary outcomes were: timely recruitment; number of participants completing the interventions; treatment compliance and barriers; follow-up rates; and treatment impact on pain and function. Fear-avoidance beliefs and clinical measures of cortical body representation (tactile acuity and left/right judgment performance) were secondary outcomes. Results: A total of 5% (19/355) of all assessed patients were eligible to participate and of these, 58% (11/19) agreed to participate. Ten patients completed the study, and 9 were successfully followed up, with treatment compliance varying between interventions. Compliance was poor for the touch discrimination component of BT. No significant effects were observed for pain relief or knee function after any treatment. A positive impact of treatment was found for fear-avoidance beliefs (usual care vs. washout, p = 0.007; BT vs. washout, p = 0.029) and left/right judgment accuracy (usual care vs. washout; p = 0.006). Conclusions: Clear barriers were identified to implementing BT in tertiary care for knee osteoarthritis. Access to all available services (especially the use of interpreters), and treatment options that do not require additional assistance to perform (e.g., touch discrimination training) represent the main lessons learned.

Improved Hand Function, Self-Rated Health, and Decreased Activity Limitations: Results After a Two-Month Hand Osteoarthritis Group Intervention

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects on hand function, activity limitations, and self-rated health of a primary care hand osteoarthritis (OA) group intervention. Hand OA causes pain, impaired mobility, and reduced grip force, which cause activity limitations. OA group interventions in primary care settings are sparsely reported.

METHODS

Sixty-four individuals with hand OA agreed to participate; 15 were excluded due to not fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The 49 remaining (90% female) participated in an OA group intervention at a primary care unit with education, paraffin wax bath, and hand exercise over a 6-week period. Data were collected at baseline, end of intervention, and after 1 year. Instruments used were the Grip Ability Test (GAT), the Signals of Functional Impairment (SOFI), dynamometry (grip force), hand pain at rest using a visual analog scale (VAS), the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick-DASH), and the EuroQol VAS (EQ VAS). Data were analyzed using nonparametric statistics.

RESULTS

Hand function, activity limitation, and self-rated health significantly improved from baseline to end of intervention, grip force (right hand: P < 0.001; left hand: P = 0.008), SOFI (P = 0.011), GAT (P < 0.001), hand pain at rest (P < 0.001), PSFS (1: P = 0.008, 2: P < 0.001, and 3: P = 0.004), Quick-DASH (P = 0.001), and EQ VAS (P = 0.039), and the effects were sustained after 1 year.

CONCLUSION

The hand OA group intervention in primary care improves hand function, activity limitation, and self-rated health. The benefits are sustained 1 year after completion of the intervention.

Analysis of data collected from right and left limbs: Accounting for dependence and improving statistical efficiency in musculoskeletal research

OBJECTIVES

Statistical techniques currently used in musculoskeletal research often inefficiently account for paired-limb measurements or the relationship between measurements taken from multiple regions within limbs. This study compared three commonly used analysis methods with a mixed-models approach that appropriately accounted for the association between limbs, regions, and trials and that utilised all information available from repeated trials.

METHOD

Four analysis were applied to an existing data set containing plantar pressure data, which was collected for seven masked regions on right and left feet, over three trials, across three participant groups. Methods 1-3 averaged data over trials and analysed right foot data (Method 1), data from a randomly selected foot (Method 2), and averaged right and left foot data (Method 3). Method 4 used all available data in a mixed-effects regression that accounted for repeated measures taken for each foot, foot region and trial. Confidence interval widths for the mean differences between groups for each foot region were used as a criterion for comparison of statistical efficiency.

RESULTS

Mean differences in pressure between groups were similar across methods for each foot region, while the confidence interval widths were consistently smaller for Method 4. Method 4 also revealed significant between-group differences that were not detected by Methods 1-3.

CONCLUSION

A mixed effects linear model approach generates improved efficiency and power by producing more precise estimates compared to alternative approaches that discard information in the process of accounting for paired-limb measurements. This approach is recommended in generating more clinically sound and statistically efficient research outputs.

Exercise for Hand Osteoarthritis: A Cochrane Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of exercise compared with other interventions, including placebo or no intervention, in people with hand osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Systematic review using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Six electronic databases were searched up until September 2015.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

randomized or controlled clinical trials comparing therapeutic exercise versus no exercise, or comparing different exercise programs.

MAIN OUTCOMES

hand pain, hand function, finger joint stiffness, quality of life, adverse events, and withdrawals because of adverse effects. Risk of bias and quality of the evidence were assessed.

RESULTS

Seven trials were included in the review, and up to 5 trials (n = 381) were included in the pooled analyses with data from postintervention. Compared to no exercise, low-quality evidence indicated that exercise may improve hand pain [5 trials, standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.27, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.07], hand function (4 trials, SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.02), and finger joint stiffness (4 trials, SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.15) in people with hand OA. Quality of life was evaluated by 1 study (113 participants) showing very low-quality evidence for no difference. Three studies reported on adverse events, which were very few and not severe.

CONCLUSION

Pooled results from 5 studies with low risk of bias showed low-quality evidence for small to moderate beneficial effects of exercise on hand pain, function, and finger joint stiffness postintervention. Estimated effect sizes were small, and whether they represent a clinically important change may be debated.

Systematic review of non-surgical therapies for osteoarthritis of the hand: an update

OBJECTIVE

To update our earlier systematic reviews which evaluated all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies in patients with hand osteoarthritis (OA). Surgical therapies were not evaluated.

DESIGN

RCTs published between March 2008 and December 2015 were added to the previous systematic reviews.

RESULTS

A total of 95 RCTs evaluating various pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies in hand OA were analyzed in this update. Generally, the methodological quality of these RCTs has improved since the last update, with more studies describing their methods for randomization, blinding, and allocation concealment. However, RCTs continue to be weakened by a lack of consistent case definition and a lack of standardized outcome assessments specific to hand OA. The number and location of evaluated hand joints continues to be underreported, and only 25% of RCTs adequately described the method used to ensure allocation concealment. These remain major weaknesses of published RCTs. A meta-analysis could not be performed because of marked study heterogeneity, insufficient statistical data available in the published RCTs, and a small number of identical comparators.

CONCLUSION

Hand OA is a complex area in which to study the efficacy of therapies. There has been an improvement in the overall design and conduct of RCTs, however, additional large RCTs with a more robust methodological approach specific to hand OA are needed in order to make clinically relevant conclusions about the efficacy of the diverse treatment options available.

The effects of resistance training on muscle strength, joint pain, and hand function in individuals with hand osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hand osteoarthritis is a common condition characterised by joint pain and muscle weakness. These factors are thought to contribute to ongoing disability. Some evidence exists that resistance training decreases pain, improves muscle strength, and enhances function in people with knee and hip osteoarthritis. However, there is currently a lack of consensus regarding its effectiveness in people with hand osteoarthritis. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish whether resistance training in people with hand osteoarthritis increases grip strength, decreases joint pain, and improves hand function.

Methods

Seven databases were searched from 1975 until July 1, 2016. Randomised controlled trials were included. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess studies’ methodological quality. The Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was adopted to rate overall quality of evidence. Suitable studies were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.

Results

Five studies were included with a total of 350 participants. The majority of the training programs did not meet recommended intensity, frequency, or progression criteria for muscle strengthening. There was moderate-quality evidence that resistance training does not improve grip strength (mean difference = 1.35; 95% confidence interval (CI) = –0.84, 3.54; I² = 50%; p = 0.23 ). Low-quality evidence showed significant improvements in joint pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) = –0.23; 95% CI = –0.42, –0.04; I² = 0%; p = 0.02) which were not clinically relevant. Low-quality evidence demonstrated no improvements in hand function following resistance training (SMD = –0.1; 95% CI = –0.33, 0.13; I² = 28%; p = 0.39).

Conclusion

There is no evidence that resistance training has a significant effect on grip strength or hand function in people with hand osteoarthritis. Low-quality evidence suggests it has a small, clinically unimportant pain-relieving effect. Future studies should investigate resistance training regimes with adequate intensity, frequency, and progressions to achieve gains in muscle strength.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-017-1348-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Exercise for hand osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent joint disease that may lead to pain, stiffness and problems in performing hand-related activities of daily living. Currently, no cure for OA is known, and non-pharmacological modalities are recommended as first-line care. A positive effect of exercise in hip and knee OA has been documented, but the effect of exercise on hand OA remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of exercise compared with other interventions, including placebo or no intervention, in people with hand OA. Main outcomes are hand pain and hand function.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched six electronic databases up until September 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and controlled clinical trials comparing therapeutic exercise versus no exercise or comparing different exercise programmes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and assessed the quality of the body of evidence using the GRADE approach. Outcomes consisted of both continuous (hand pain, physical function, finger joint stiffness and quality of life) and dichotomous outcomes (proportions of adverse events and withdrawals).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies in the review. Most studies were free from selection and reporting bias, but one study was available only as a congress abstract. It was not possible to blind participants to treatment allocation, and although most studies reported blinded outcome assessors, some outcomes (pain, function, stiffness and quality of life) were self-reported. The results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias owing to unblinded participants and self-reported outcomes. Two studies with high drop-out rates may be vulnerable to attrition bias. We downgraded the overall quality of the body of evidence to low owing to potential detection bias (lack of blinding of participants on self-reported outcomes) and imprecision (studies were few, the number of participants was limited and confidence intervals were wide for the outcomes pain, function and joint stiffness). For quality of life, adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events, we further downgraded the overall quality of the body of evidence to very low because studies were very few and confidence intervals were very wide.Low-quality evidence from five trials (381 participants) indicated that exercise reduced hand pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.47 to -0.07) post intervention. The absolute reduction in pain for the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 5% (1% to 9%) on a 0 to 10 point scale. Pain was estimated to be 3.9 points on this scale (0 = no pain) in the control group, and exercise reduced pain by 0.5 points (95% CI 0.1 to 0.9; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 9).Four studies (369 participants) indicated that exercise improved hand function (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.02) post intervention. The absolute improvement in function noted in the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 6% (0.4% worsening to 13% improvement). Function was estimated at 14.5 points on a 0 to 36 point scale (0 = no physical disability) in the control group, and exercise improved function by 2.2 points (95% CI -0.2 to 4.6; NNTB 9).One study (113 participants) evaluated quality of life, and the effect of exercise on quality of life is currently uncertain (mean difference (MD) 0.30, 95% CI -3.72 to 4.32). The absolute improvement in quality of life for the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 0.3% (4% worsening to 4% improvement). Quality of life was 50.4 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (100 = maximum quality of life) in the control group, and the mean score in the exercise group was 0.3 points higher (3.5 points lower to 4.1 points higher).Four studies (369 participants) indicated that exercise reduced finger joint stiffness (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.15) post intervention. The absolute reduction in finger joint stiffness for the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 7% (3% to 10%). Finger joint stiffness was estimated at 4.5 points on a 0 to 10 point scale (0 = no stiffness) in the control group, and exercise improved stiffness by 0.7 points (95% CI 0.3 to 1.0; NNTB 7).Three studies reported intervention-related adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events. The few reported adverse events consisted of increased finger joint inflammation and hand pain. Low-quality evidence from the three studies showed an increased likelihood of adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 4.55, 95% CI 0.53 to 39.31) and of withdrawals due to adverse events in the exercise group compared with the control group (RR 2.88, 95% CI 0.30 to 27.18), but the effect is uncertain and further research may change the estimates.Included studies did not measure radiographic joint structure changes. Two studies provided six-month follow-up data (220 participants), and one (102 participants) provided 12-month follow-up data. The positive effect of exercise on pain, function and joint stiffness was not sustained at medium- and long-term follow-up.The exercise intervention varied largely in terms of dosage, content and number of supervised sessions. Participants were instructed to exercise two to three times a week in four studies, daily in two studies and three to four times daily in another study. Exercise interventions in all seven studies aimed to improve muscle strength and joint stability or function, but the numbers and types of exercises varied largely across studies. Four studies reported adherence to the exercise programme; in three studies, this was self-reported. Self-reported adherence to the recommended frequency of exercise sessions ranged between 78% and 94%. In the fourth study, 67% fulfilled at least 16 of the 18 scheduled exercise sessions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When we pooled results from five studies, we found low-quality evidence showing small beneficial effects of exercise on hand pain, function and finger joint stiffness. Estimated effect sizes were small, and whether they represent a clinically important change may be debated. One study reported quality of life, and the effect is uncertain. Three studies reported on adverse events, which were very few and were not severe.

Does occupational therapy reduce the need for surgery in carpometacarpal osteoarthritis? Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In the absence of disease-modifying interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA), occupational therapy (OT) comprising patient education, hand exercises, assistive devices and orthoses are considered as core treatments, whereas surgery are recommended for those with severe carpometacarpal (CMC1) OA. However, even though CMC1 surgery may reduce pain and improve function, the risk of adverse effects is high, and randomized controlled trials comparing surgery with non-surgical interventions are warranted. This multicentre randomized controlled trial aims to address the following questions: Does OT in the period before surgical consultation reduce the need for surgery in CMC1-OA? What are patients' motivation and reasons for wanting CMC1-surgery? Are there differences between departments of rheumatology concerning the degree of CMC1-OA, pain and functional limitations in patients who are referred for surgical consultation for CMC1 surgery? Is the Measure of Activity Performance of the Hand a reliable measure in patients with CMC1-OA? Do patients with CMC1-OA with and without affection of the distal and proximal interphalangeal finger joints differ with regard to symptoms and function? Do the degree of CMC1-OA, symptoms and functional limitations significantly predict improvement after 2 years following OT or CMC1-surgery? Is OT more cost-effective than surgery in the management of CMC1-OA?

METHODS/DESIGN

All persons referred for surgical consultation due to their CMC1-OA at one of three Norwegian departments of rheumatology are invited to participate. Those who agree attend a clinical assessment and report their symptoms, function and motivation for surgery in validated outcome measures, before they are randomly selected to receive OT in the period before surgical consultation (estimated n = 180). The primary outcome will be the number of participants in each group who have received surgical treatment after 2 years. Secondary and tertiary outcomes are pain, function and satisfaction with care over the 2-year trial period. Outcomes will be collected at baseline, 4, 18 and 24 months. The main analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis, using logistic regression, comparing the number of participants in each group who have received surgical treatment after 2 years.

DISCUSSION

The findings will improve the evidence-based management of HOA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER

NCT01794754 . First registrated February 15^th 2013.

Rehabilitation (exercise and strength training) and osteoarthritis: A critical narrative review

Rehabilitation is widely recommended in national and international guidelines for managing osteoarthritis (OA) in primary care settings. According to the 2014 OA Research Society International (OARSI) recommendations, rehabilitation is even considered the core treatment of OA and is recommended for all patients. Rehabilitation for OA widely includes land- and water-based exercise, strength training, weight management, self-management and education, biomechanical interventions, and physically active lifestyle. We performed a critical narrative review of the efficacy and safety of rehabilitation for managing OA and discuss evidence-based international recommendations. The process of article selection was unsystematic. Articles were selected based on authors' expertise, self-knowledge, and reflective practice. For the purpose of the review, we focused on land- and water-based exercise and strength training for knee, hip and hand OA. Other aspects of rehabilitation in OA are treated elsewhere in this special issue. Exercise therapy is widely recommended for managing knee, hip and hand OA. However, the level of evidence varies according to OA location. Overall, consistent evidence suggests that exercise therapy and specific strengthening exercise or strength training for the lower limb reduce pain and improve physical function in knee OA. Evidence for other OA sites are less consistent. Therefore, because of the lack of specific studies, recommendations for hip and hand OA are mainly derived from studies of knee OA. In addition, no recommendations have been established regarding the exercise regimen. The efficacy and safety of exercise therapy and strength training need to be further evaluated in randomized controlled trials of patients with hip and hand OA. The optimal delivery of exercise programs also has to be more clearly defined.

Osteoarthritis year in review 2015: clinical

The purpose of this review is to highlight clinical research in osteoarthritis (OA). A literature search was conducted using PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/) with the search terms "osteoarthritis [All Fields] AND treatment [All Fields]" and the following limits activated: humans, English language, all adult 19+ years, published between April 1, 2014 and April 1, 2015. A second literature search was then conducted with the search terms "osteoarthritis [All Fields] AND epidemiology [All Fields]", with the same limits. Reports of surgical outcome, case series, surgical technique, tissue sample or culture studies, trial protocols, and pilot studies were excluded. Of 1523, 150 were considered relevant. Among epidemiologic and observational clinical studies, themes included physical activity, early knee OA, and confidence/instability/falls. Symptom outcomes of pharmacologic treatments were reported for methotrexate, adalimumab, anti-nerve growth factor monoclonal antibodies, strontium ranelate, bisphosphonates, glucosamine, and chondroitin sulfate, and structural outcomes of pharmacologic treatments for strontium ranelate, recombinant human fibroblast growth factor 18, and glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate. Symptom outcomes of non-pharmacologic interventions were reported for: neuromuscular exercise, quadriceps strengthening, weight reduction and maintenance, TENS, therapeutic ultrasound, stepped care strategies, cognitive behavior therapy for sleep disturbance, acupuncture, gait modification, booster physical therapy, a web-based therapeutic exercise resource center for knee OA; hip physical therapy for hip OA; and joint protection and hand exercises for hand OA. Structure outcomes of non-pharmacologic interventions were reported for patellofemoral bracing.