1
|
Holden MA, Hattle M, Runhaar J, Riley RD, Healey EL, Quicke J, van der Windt DA, Dziedzic K, van Middelkoop M, Burke D, Corp N, Legha A, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Foster NE. Moderators of the effect of therapeutic exercise for knee and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet Rheumatol 2023; 5:e386-e400. [PMID: 38251550 DOI: 10.1016/s2665-9913(23)00122-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2023] [Revised: 04/08/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many international clinical guidelines recommend therapeutic exercise as a core treatment for knee and hip osteoarthritis. We aimed to identify individual patient-level moderators of the effect of therapeutic exercise for reducing pain and improving physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, or both. METHODS We did a systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing therapeutic exercise with non-exercise controls in people with knee osteoathritis, hip osteoarthritis, or both. We searched ten databases from March 1, 2012, to Feb 25, 2019, for randomised controlled trials comparing the effects of exercise with non-exercise or other exercise controls on pain and physical function outcomes among people with knee osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, or both. IPD were requested from leads of all eligible randomised controlled trials. 12 potential moderators of interest were explored to ascertain whether they were associated with short-term (12 weeks), medium-term (6 months), and long-term (12 months) effects of exercise on self-reported pain and physical function, in comparison with non-exercise controls. Overall intervention effects were also summarised. This study is prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017054049). FINDINGS Of 91 eligible randomised controlled trials that compared exercise with non-exercise controls, IPD from 31 randomised controlled trials (n=4241 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Randomised controlled trials included participants with knee osteoarthritis (18 [58%] of 31 trials), hip osteoarthritis (six [19%]), or both (seven [23%]) and tested heterogeneous exercise interventions versus heterogeneous non-exercise controls, with variable risk of bias. Summary meta-analysis results showed that, on average, compared with non-exercise controls, therapeutic exercise reduced pain on a standardised 0-100 scale (with 100 corresponding to worst pain), with a difference of -6·36 points (95% CI -8·45 to -4·27, borrowing of strength [BoS] 10·3%, between-study variance [τ2] 21·6) in the short term, -3·77 points (-5·97 to -1·57, BoS 30·0%, τ2 14·4) in the medium term, and -3·43 points (-5·18 to -1·69, BoS 31·7%, τ2 4·5) in the long term. Therapeutic exercise also improved physical function on a standardised 0-100 scale (with 100 corresponding to worst physical function), with a difference of -4·46 points in the short term (95% CI -5·95 to -2·98, BoS 10·5%, τ2 10·1), -2·71 points in the medium term (-4·63 to -0·78, BoS 33·6%, τ2 11·9), and -3·39 points in the long term (-4·97 to -1·81, BoS 34·1%, τ2 6·4). Baseline pain and physical function moderated the effect of exercise on pain and physical function outcomes. Those with higher self-reported pain and physical function scores at baseline (ie, poorer physical function) generally benefited more than those with lower self-reported pain and physical function scores at baseline, with the evidence most certain in the short term (12 weeks). INTERPRETATION There was evidence of a small, positive overall effect of therapeutic exercise on pain and physical function compared with non-exercise controls. However, this effect is of questionable clinical importance, particularly in the medium and long term. As individuals with higher pain severity and poorer physical function at baseline benefited more than those with lower pain severity and better physical function at baseline, targeting individuals with higher levels of osteoarthritis-related pain and disability for therapeutic exercise might be of merit. FUNDING Chartered Society of Physiotherapy Charitable Trust and the National Institute for Health and Care Research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melanie A Holden
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK.
| | - Miriam Hattle
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jos Runhaar
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK; Erasmus MC University, Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Richard D Riley
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK; University of Birmingham, Institute of Applied Health Research, Birmingham, UK
| | - Emma L Healey
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jonathan Quicke
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK; Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, London, UK
| | | | - Krysia Dziedzic
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | | | - Danielle Burke
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Nadia Corp
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Amardeep Legha
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | | | - Nadine E Foster
- School of Medicine, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, Keele University, Keele, UK; Surgical Treatment and Rehabilitation Service, The University of Queensland and Metro North Health, Herston, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Riley RD, Legha A, Jackson D, Morris TP, Ensor J, Snell KIE, White IR, Burke DL. One-stage individual participant data meta-analysis models for continuous and binary outcomes: Comparison of treatment coding options and estimation methods. Stat Med 2020; 39:2536-2555. [PMID: 32394498 DOI: 10.1002/sim.8555] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2019] [Revised: 12/09/2019] [Accepted: 04/03/2020] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
A one-stage individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis synthesizes IPD from multiple studies using a general or generalized linear mixed model. This produces summary results (eg, about treatment effect) in a single step, whilst accounting for clustering of participants within studies (via a stratified study intercept, or random study intercepts) and between-study heterogeneity (via random treatment effects). We use simulation to evaluate the performance of restricted maximum likelihood (REML) and maximum likelihood (ML) estimation of one-stage IPD meta-analysis models for synthesizing randomized trials with continuous or binary outcomes. Three key findings are identified. First, for ML or REML estimation of stratified intercept or random intercepts models, a t-distribution based approach generally improves coverage of confidence intervals for the summary treatment effect, compared with a z-based approach. Second, when using ML estimation of a one-stage model with a stratified intercept, the treatment variable should be coded using "study-specific centering" (ie, 1/0 minus the study-specific proportion of participants in the treatment group), as this reduces the bias in the between-study variance estimate (compared with 1/0 and other coding options). Third, REML estimation reduces downward bias in between-study variance estimates compared with ML estimation, and does not depend on the treatment variable coding; for binary outcomes, this requires REML estimation of the pseudo-likelihood, although this may not be stable in some situations (eg, when data are sparse). Two applied examples are used to illustrate the findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard D Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Amardeep Legha
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Dan Jackson
- Statistical Innovation Group, Advanced Analytics Centre, AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK
| | - Tim P Morris
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK
| | - Joie Ensor
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Kym I E Snell
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Ian R White
- Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK
| | - Danielle L Burke
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Legha A, Burke DL, Foster NE, van der Windt DA, Quicke JG, Healey EL, Runhaar J, Holden MA. Do comorbidities predict pain and function in knee osteoarthritis following an exercise intervention, and do they moderate the effect of exercise? Analyses of data from three randomized controlled trials. Musculoskeletal Care 2019; 18:3-11. [PMID: 31837126 DOI: 10.1002/msc.1425] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/09/2019] [Revised: 07/23/2019] [Accepted: 07/27/2019] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although exercise is a core treatment for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA), it is currently unknown whether those with additional comorbidities respond differently to exercise than those without. We explored whether comorbidities predict pain and function following an exercise intervention in people with knee OA, and whether they moderate response to: exercise versus no exercise; and enhanced exercise versus usual exercise-based care. METHODS We undertook analyses of existing data from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs): TOPIK (n = 217), APEX (n = 352) and Benefits of Effective Exercise for knee Pain (BEEP) (n = 514). All three RCTs included: adults with knee pain attributable to OA; physiotherapy-led exercise; data on six comorbidities (overweight/obesity, pain elsewhere, anxiety/depression, cardiac problems, diabetes mellitus and respiratory conditions); the outcomes of interest (six-month Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index knee pain and function). Adjusted mixed models were fitted where data was available; otherwise linear regression models were used. RESULTS Obesity compared with underweight/normal body mass index was significantly associated with knee pain following exercise, as was the presence compared with absence of anxiety/depression. The presence of cardiac problems was significantly associated with the effect of enhanced versus usual exercise-based care for knee function, indicating that enhanced exercise may be less effective for improving knee function in people with cardiac problems. Associations for all other potential prognostic factors and moderators were weak and not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Obesity and anxiety/depression predicted pain and function outcomes in people offered an exercise intervention, but only the presence of cardiac problems might moderate the effect of exercise for knee OA. Further confirmatory investigations are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amardeep Legha
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Danielle L Burke
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.,Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Nadine E Foster
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.,Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Danielle A van der Windt
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.,Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jonathan G Quicke
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Emma L Healey
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jos Runhaar
- Department of General Practice, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Melanie A Holden
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.,Keele Clinical Trials Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Legha A, Riley RD, Ensor J, Snell KIE, Morris TP, Burke DL. Individual participant data meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: A comparison of approaches for specifying and estimating one-stage models. Stat Med 2018; 37:4404-4420. [PMID: 30101507 PMCID: PMC6283045 DOI: 10.1002/sim.7930] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2018] [Revised: 07/10/2018] [Accepted: 07/11/2018] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
One‐stage individual participant data meta‐analysis models should account for within‐trial clustering, but it is currently debated how to do this. For continuous outcomes modeled using a linear regression framework, two competing approaches are a stratified intercept or a random intercept. The stratified approach involves estimating a separate intercept term for each trial, whereas the random intercept approach assumes that trial intercepts are drawn from a normal distribution. Here, through an extensive simulation study for continuous outcomes, we evaluate the impact of using the stratified and random intercept approaches on statistical properties of the summary treatment effect estimate. Further aims are to compare (i) competing estimation options for the one‐stage models, including maximum likelihood and restricted maximum likelihood, and (ii) competing options for deriving confidence intervals (CI) for the summary treatment effect, including the standard normal‐based 95% CI, and more conservative approaches of Kenward‐Roger and Satterthwaite, which inflate CIs to account for uncertainty in variance estimates. The findings reveal that, for an individual participant data meta‐analysis of randomized trials with a 1:1 treatment:control allocation ratio and heterogeneity in the treatment effect, (i) bias and coverage of the summary treatment effect estimate are very similar when using stratified or random intercept models with restricted maximum likelihood, and thus either approach could be taken in practice, (ii) CIs are generally best derived using either a Kenward‐Roger or Satterthwaite correction, although occasionally overly conservative, and (iii) if maximum likelihood is required, a random intercept performs better than a stratified intercept model. An illustrative example is provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amardeep Legha
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Richard D Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Joie Ensor
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Kym I E Snell
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Tim P Morris
- London Hub for Trials Methodology Research, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, UK
| | - Danielle L Burke
- Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Babatunde OO, Legha A, Littlewood C, Chesterton LS, Thomas MJ, Menz HB, van der Windt D, Roddy E. Comparative effectiveness of treatment options for plantar heel pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2018; 53:182-194. [PMID: 29954828 DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098998] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/01/2018] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of current treatment options for plantar heel pain (PHP). DESIGN Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). DATA SOURCES Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro, Cochrane Database, Web of Science and WHO Clinical Trials Platform were searched from their inception until January 2018. STUDY SELECTION Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with PHP investigating common treatments (ie, corticosteroid injection, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, therapeutic exercise, orthoses and/or extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT)) compared with each other or a no treatment, placebo/sham control. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS Data were extracted and checked for accuracy and completeness by pairs of reviewers. Primary outcomes were pain and function. Comparative treatment effects were analysed by random effects NMA in the short term, medium term and long term. Relative ranking of treatments was assessed by surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities (0-100 scale). RESULTS Thirty-one RCTs (total n=2450 patients) were included. There was no evidence of inconsistency detected between direct and indirect treatment comparisons in the networks, but sparse data led to frequently wide CIs. Available evidence does not suggest that any of the commonly used treatments for the management of PHP are better than any other, although corticosteroid injections, alone or in combination with exercise, and ESWT were ranked most likely to be effective for the management of short-term, medium-term and long-term pain or function; placebo/sham/control appeared least likely to be effective; and exercise appeared to only be beneficial for long-term pain or function. CONCLUSIONS Current evidence is equivocal regarding which treatment is the most effective for the management of PHP. Given limited understanding of long-term effects, there is need for large, methodologically robust multicentre RCTs investigating and directly comparing commonly used treatments for the management of PHP. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42016046963.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Opeyemi O Babatunde
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Amardeep Legha
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.,Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Chris Littlewood
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Linda S Chesterton
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Martin J Thomas
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.,Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Partnership NHS Trust, Haywood Hospital, Burslem, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Hylton B Menz
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.,School of Allied Health, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Bundoora Victoria, Australia
| | - Danielle van der Windt
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.,Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Edward Roddy
- Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.,Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Partnership NHS Trust, Haywood Hospital, Burslem, Staffordshire, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Holden MA, Burke DL, Runhaar J, van Der Windt D, Riley RD, Dziedzic K, Legha A, Evans AL, Abbott JH, Baker K, Brown J, Bennell KL, Bossen D, Brosseau L, Chaipinyo K, Christensen R, Cochrane T, de Rooij M, Doherty M, French HP, Hickson S, Hinman RS, Hopman-Rock M, Hurley MV, Ingram C, Knoop J, Krauss I, McCarthy C, Messier SP, Patrick DL, Sahin N, Talbot LA, Taylor R, Teirlinck CH, van Middelkoop M, Walker C, Foster NE. Subgrouping and TargetEd Exercise pRogrammes for knee and hip OsteoArthritis (STEER OA): a systematic review update and individual participant data meta-analysis protocol. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e018971. [PMID: 29275348 PMCID: PMC5770908 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2017] [Revised: 10/09/2017] [Accepted: 10/19/2017] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Therapeutic exercise is a recommended core treatment for people with knee and hip OA, however, the observed effect sizes for reducing pain and improving physical function are small to moderate. This may be due to insufficient targeting of exercise to subgroups of people who are most likely to respond and/or suboptimal content of exercise programmes. This study aims to identify: (1) subgroups of people with knee and hip OA that do/do not respond to therapeutic exercise and to different types of exercise and (2) mediators of the effect of therapeutic exercise for reducing pain and improving physical function. This will enable optimal targeting and refining the content of future exercise interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Systematic review and individual participant data meta-analyses. A previous comprehensive systematic review will be updated to identify randomised controlled trials that compare the effects of therapeutic exercise for people with knee and hip OA on pain and physical function to a non-exercise control. Lead authors of eligible trials will be invited to share individual participant data. Trial-level and participant-level characteristics (for baseline variables and outcomes) of included studies will be summarised. Meta-analyses will use a two-stage approach, where effect estimates are obtained for each trial and then synthesised using a random effects model (to account for heterogeneity). All analyses will be on an intention-to-treat principle and all summary meta-analysis estimates will be reported as standardised mean differences with 95% CI. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Research ethical or governance approval is exempt as no new data are being collected and no identifiable participant information will be shared. Findings will be disseminated via national and international conferences, publication in peer-reviewed journals and summaries posted on websites accessed by the public and clinicians. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42017054049.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melanie A Holden
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Danielle L Burke
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jos Runhaar
- Department of General Practice, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Danielle van Der Windt
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Richard D Riley
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Krysia Dziedzic
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Amardeep Legha
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Amy L Evans
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - J Haxby Abbott
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Centre for Musculoskeletal Outcomes Research, Orthopaedic Surgery Section, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
| | - Kristin Baker
- Sargent College, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Jenny Brown
- Research User Group, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Kim L Bennell
- Department of Physiotherapy, Centre for Health, Exercise & Sports Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Daniël Bossen
- Faculty of Health, ACHIEVE Centre of Expertise, Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lucie Brosseau
- Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Kanda Chaipinyo
- Division of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Science, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Robin Christensen
- Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit, The Parker Institute, Frederiksberg and Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Tom Cochrane
- Centre for Research Action in Public Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
| | - Mariette de Rooij
- Amsterdam Rehabilitation Research Centre, Centre for Rehabilitation and Rheumatology, Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Doherty
- Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK
| | - Helen P French
- School of Physiotherapy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Sheila Hickson
- Research User Group, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Rana S Hinman
- Department of Physiotherapy, Centre for Health, Exercise & Sports Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Marijke Hopman-Rock
- TNO Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael V Hurley
- Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education, St George's University of London and Kingston University, London, UK
- Health Innovation Network South London, London, UK
| | - Carol Ingram
- Research User Group, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Jesper Knoop
- Amsterdam Rehabilitation Research Centre, Centre for Rehabilitation and Rheumatology, Reade, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Inga Krauss
- Department of Sports Medicine, Medical Clinic, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Chris McCarthy
- Manchester Movement Unit, Manchester School of Physiotherapy, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
| | - Stephen P Messier
- J.B. Snow Biomechanics Laboratory, Department of Health and Exercise Science, Worrell Professional Center, Wake Forest University, Winston Salem, USA
| | - Donald L Patrick
- Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Nilay Sahin
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Medical Faculty, Balikesir University, Balikesir, Turkey
| | - Laura A Talbot
- Department of Neurology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, College of Medicine, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Robert Taylor
- Research User Group, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Carolien H Teirlinck
- Department of General Practice, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marienke van Middelkoop
- Department of General Practice, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Christine Walker
- Research User Group, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Nadine E Foster
- Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute of Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK
| |
Collapse
|