Progressive Resistance Training or Neuromuscular Exercise for Hip Osteoarthritis : A Multicenter Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Exercise is recommended as first-line treatment for patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). However, randomized controlled trials providing evidence for the optimal exercise type are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether progressive resistance training (PRT) is superior to neuromuscular exercise (NEMEX) for improving functional performance in patients with hip OA. DESIGN: Multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, superiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04714047). SETTING: Hospitals and physiotherapy clinics. PARTICIPANTS: 160 participants with clinically diagnosed hip OA were enrolled from 18 January 2021 to 28 April 2023 and randomly assigned to PRT (n = 82) or NEMEX (n = 78). INTERVENTION: Twelve weeks of PRT or NEMEX with 2 supervised 60-minute group sessions each week. The PRT intervention consisted of 5 high-intensity resistance training exercises targeting muscles at the hip and knee joints. The NEMEX intervention included 10 exercises and emphasized sensorimotor control and functional stability. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was change in the 30-second chair stand test (30s-CST). Key secondary outcomes were changes in scores on the pain and hip-related quality of life (QoL) subscales of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). RESULTS: The mean changes from baseline to 12-week follow-up in the 30s-CST were 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with PRT and 1.5 (CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with NEMEX (difference, 0.0 [CI, -0.8 to 0.8] chair stands). For the HOOS pain subscale, mean changes were 8.6 (CI, 5.3 to 11.8) points with PRT and 9.3 (CI, 5.9 to 12.6) points with NEMEX (difference, -0.7 [CI, -5.3 to 4.0] points). For the HOOS QoL subscale, mean changes were 8.0 (CI, 4.3 to 11.7) points with PRT and 5.7 (CI, 1.9 to 9.5) points with NEMEX (difference, 2.3 [CI, -3.0 to 7.6] points). LIMITATION: Participants and physiotherapists were not blinded. CONCLUSION: In patients with hip OA, PRT is not superior to NEMEX for improving functional performance, hip pain, or hip-related QoL. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Independent Research Fund Denmark.

Patient and public involvement to inform the protocol of a clinical trial comparing total hip arthroplasty with exercise: an exploratory qualitative case study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore patient, clinician and decision-maker perceptions on a clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared with exercise to inform the trial protocol. DESIGN: This is an exploratory qualitative case study using a constructivist paradigm. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were enrolled into three key stakeholder groups: patients eligible for THA, clinicians, and decision makers. Focus group interviews were conducted in undisturbed conference rooms at two hospitals in Denmark, according to group status using semi-structured interview guides. ANALYSIS: Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematic analysed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: We conducted 4 focus group interviews with 14 patients, 1 focus group interview with 4 clinicians (2 orthopaedic surgeons and 2 physiotherapists) and 1 focus group interview with 4 decision-makers. Two main themes were generated. 'Treatment expectations and beliefs impact management choices' covered three supporting codes: Treatment without surgery is unlikely to lead to recovery; Clinician authority impacts the management narrative; The 'surgery vs exercise' debate. 'Factors influencing clinical trial integrity and feasibility' highlighted three supporting codes: Who is considered eligible for surgery?; Facilitators and barriers for surgery and exercise in a clinical trial context; Improvements in hip pain and hip function are the most important outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Based on key stakeholder treatment expectations and beliefs, we implemented three main strategies to improve the methodological rigorousness of our trial protocol. First, we added an observational study investigating the generalisability to address a potential low enrolment rate. Second, we developed an enrolment procedure using generic guidance and balanced narrative conveyed by an independent clinician to facilitate communication of clinical equipoise. Third, we adopted change in hip pain and function as the primary outcome. These findings highlight the value of patient and public involvement in the development of trial protocols to reduce bias in comparative clinical trials evaluating surgical and non-surgical management. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04070027 (pre-results).

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

INTRODUCTION: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is the leading cause for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although, being considered as the surgery of the century up to 23% of the patients report long-term pain, and deficits in physical function and muscle strength may persist after THA. Progressive resistance training (PRT) appears to improve multiple outcomes moderately in patients with hip OA. Current treatment selection is based on low-level evidence as no randomised controlled trials have compared THA to non-surgical treatment. The primary aim of this trial is to investigate whether THA followed by standard care is superior to 12 weeks of supervised PRT followed by 12 weeks of optional unsupervised PRT for improving hip pain and function in patients with severe hip OA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a multicentre, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled superiority trial conducted at four hospitals across three healthcare regions in Denmark. 120 patients aged ≥50 years with clinical and radiographic hip OA found eligible for THA by an orthopaedic surgeon will be randomised to THA followed by standard care, or 12 weeks of PRT (allocation 1:1). The primary outcome will be change in patient-reported hip pain and function, measured using the Oxford Hip Score, from baseline to 6 months after initiating the treatment. Key secondary outcomes will be change in the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, University of California Los Angeles Activity Score, 40 m fast-paced walk test, 30 s chair stand test and occurrence of serious adverse events. Patients declining participation in the trial will be invited into a prospective observational cohort study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by The Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark (Project-ID: S-20180158). All results will be presented in peer-reviewed scientific journals and international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04070027).

[Effect of training in the different stages of hip osteoarthritis].

Training may relieve symptoms in patients with mild to severe hip osteoarthritis and in patients who have received a total hip arthroplasty. Patients may train like healthy individuals. The effectiveness of training is dependent on sufficient dose and intensity. In this review, we suggest to prioritise research performed in the pre-clinical or in the mild to moderate stage of hip osteoarthritis where there is insufficient evidence on whether training has a disease-modifying effect or not. We also suggest that trials with long-term follow-up are performed for these patient groups.

Exercise as Medicine During the Course of Hip Osteoarthritis.

Exercise is now considered medicine in numerous chronic conditions and is essentially without side effects. We hypothesize that exercise is primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention at different stages of hip osteoarthritis (preclinical, mild-moderate, and severe hip osteoarthritis) and after total hip arthroplasty.

Sensorimotor control and neuromuscular activity of the shoulder in adolescent competitive swimmers with generalized joint hypermobility.

INTRODUCTION: Shoulder pain is highly prevalent in competitive swimmers, and generalized joint hypermobility (GJH) is considered a risk factor. Sensorimotor control deficiencies and altered neuromuscular activation of the shoulder may represent underlying factors. RESEARCH QUESTION: To investigate whether competitive swimmers with GJH including shoulder hypermobility (GJHS) differ in shoulder sensorimotor control and muscle activity from those without GJH and no shoulder hypermobility (NGJH). METHODS: Competitive swimmers (aged 13-17) were recruited. GJHS or NGJH status was determined using the Beighton score (0-9) and Rotès-Quérol test (positive/negative). Inclusion criteria for GJHS were a Beighton score ≥5 and minimum one hypermobile shoulder, while NGJH was defined as a Beighton score ≤3 and no shoulder hypermobility. Three prone lying, upper-extremity weight-bearing shoulder stabilometric tests were performed on a force platform: Bilateral upper-extremity support eyes open (BL-EO) and eyes closed (BL-EC) and unilateral upper-extremity support eyes open (UL-EO). Surface electromyography (SEMG) was measured from the upper trapezius, lower trapezius, serratus anterior, infraspinatus and pectoralis major muscles. SEMG was normalized using maximal voluntary isometric contractions and presented relative to maximal voluntary SEMG (%MVE). Co-contraction index (CCI) was calculated for the following muscle pairs: upper trapezius-lower trapezius, upper trapezius-serratus anterior, and infraspinatus-pectoralis major. Between-group differences in stabilometric parameters, %MVE, and CCI were analyzed with a mixed effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-eight swimmers were enrolled as GJHS (n = 19) or NGJH (n = 19). There were no group differences in stabilometric parameters or CCI. GJHS displayed significantly decreased (29%) pectoralis major activity during BL-EO compared to NGJH (5.35 ±â€¯1.77%MVE vs. 7.51 ±â€¯1.96%MVE; p = 0.043). SIGNIFICANCE: Adolescent competitive swimmers with GJHS displayed no shoulder sensorimotor control deficiencies and no generally altered shoulder muscle activity pattern, except for decreased pectoralis major activity in BL-EO. Longitudinal studies are needed to investigate whether decreased pectoralis major activation contributes to the development of shoulder pain in swimmers with GJHS.

Competitive swimmers with hypermobility have strength and fatigue deficits in shoulder medial rotation.

Generalised Joint Hypermobility including shoulder hypermobility (GJHS) in swimmers is considered an intrinsic risk factor for shoulder injuries. The aim was to investigate the association of GJHS with shoulder strength, fatigue development and muscle activity during swimming-related shoulder rotations. Totally, 38 competitive swimmers (aged 13-17 years) participated, 19 were competitive swimmers with GJHS and 19 were age, sex and club matched swimmers without GJHS. Concentric isokinetic force in medial and lateral rotations were measured at 60°/s (5 repetitions) and 180°/s (10 repetitions). Electromyographic activity was measured from upper trapezius, lower trapezius, serratus anterior, infraspinatus and pectoralis major muscles. Swimmers with GJHS produced significantly lower peak torque (0.53 vs. 0.60 Nm/kg; p = .047) and maximum work (0.62 vs. 0.71 J/kg; p = .031) than controls during medial rotation (60°/s). Swimmers with GJHS showed significantly larger isokinetic fatigue at 180°/s (0.321 J/repetition; p = .010), and tendencies to lower levels of muscle activity in infraspinatus (20%, p = .066) and pectoralis major (34%, p = .092) at 60°/s during medial rotation. Young competitive swimmers with GJHS, despite no formal diagnosis, displayed strength and fatigue deficits in medial rotation, potentially inherent with greater risk of shoulder injury. Whether GJHS swimmers benefit from medial rotation strengthening is an important topic for future studies.