GLA:D to Be Walking Better: Change in Self-Reported Difficulty Walking After Exercise Therapy and Education in Persons With Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Difficulty walking is a primary reason that individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA) seek care. We examined the change in self-reported difficulty walking after participating in the Good Life With Osteoarthritis in Denmark (GLA:D) 8-week education and exercise program and assessed patient factors associated with improvement in difficulty walking. METHODS: This was a registry-based cohort study of individuals in Denmark with knee OA who enrolled in GLA:D. Assessments were administered at baseline, program completion (~3 months), and 12 months. Our prespecified primary outcome was change in self-reported difficulty walking assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level walking item. Exposures included sociodemographic factors, measures of OA illness severity, comorbidities, and psychological factors. In those with baseline moderate/severe difficulty walking, using multivariable regression analysis, we assessed the relationship between exposures of interest and improvement to no/slight difficulty walking. RESULTS: We included 5262 participants. Of 2178 (41.4%) individuals with baseline moderate/severe difficulty walking, 51.4% and 58.3% reported no/slight difficulty walking at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Greater self-efficacy, younger age, female sex, lower BMI, less intense knee pain, and better function at baseline were associated with greater likelihood of improvement in difficulty walking, whereas severe difficulty walking at baseline and back pain intensity were associated with decreased likelihood of improvement. CONCLUSION: More than half of those with baseline difficulty walking experienced substantial improvement after completing GLA:D and this improvement was maintained at 12 months. Several patient factors were associated with the outcome, suggesting that some individuals may require additional support and extended treatment.

Benefits and harms of structured outdoor physical activity for people with somatic or mental diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the benefits and harms of structured outdoor physical activity (PA) for people living with one or more somatic or mental diseases. METHODS: We identified articles from inception until Marts 2023 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL and citation tracking in Web of Science. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining structured outdoor PA reporting physical function, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), pain or mental outcomes. We used random-effect meta-analyses and investigated heterogeneity in subgroups, sensitivity and meta-regression analyses. Observational studies and studies with insufficient data were summarized narratively. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE. RESULTS: From 4098 hits, 20 studies (19 RCTs and 1 cohort) were included (n: 1759 participants). Studies varied in type of disease and intervention. End of intervention results suggested a small effect on HRQOL (k = 10, SMD = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.19 to 0.71) and physical function (k = 14, SMD = 0.39, 95%CI: 0.13 to 0.64), while effects were moderate on mental outcomes (k = 13, SMD = -0.52, 95%CI: -0.82 to -0.23) favoring the outdoor intervention over comparators (no intervention, usual care, indoor PA or outdoor intervention without exercise). We were not able to conclude on outdoor interventions' effect on pain. Four studies reported adverse events including non-serious (pain, falls, fatigue) and serious (hospitalization, pneumonia). Certainty of evidence was overall very low. CONCLUSION: Structured outdoor PA may improve HRQOL and physical function, as well as mental health outcomes. The very low certainty of evidence calls for high quality RCTs to determine benefits and harms of structured outdoor PA.

Effect of In-Person Delivered Behavioural Interventions in People with Multimorbidity: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effect of in-person delivered behavioural interventions in people with multimorbidity and which behaviour change techniques (BCTs), targeting lifestyle behaviours, are associated with better outcomes. METHODS: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL and screened reference list of reviews including people with multimorbidity, registries, and citation tracking of included studies. Meta-analyses using random-effects model to assess the effect of behavioural interventions and meta-regression analyses and effectiveness ratios to investigate the impact of mediators on effect estimates. Cochrane 'Risk of Bias Tool' 2.0 and the GRADE assessment to evaluate the overall quality of evidence. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 1,378 people. Behavioural interventions had little to no effect on physical activity (standardised mean difference 0.38, 95% CI -0.12-0.87) and the effect on weight loss was uncertain (BMI mean difference -0.17, 95% CI -1.1-0.83) at the end-treatment follow-up. Small improvements were seen in health-related quality of life (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.17-0.42) and physical function (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.12-0.73), and moderate improvements were seen for depression symptoms (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -0.97-0.42). Studies using the BCTs 'action planning' and 'social support (practical)' reported greater physical activity and weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural interventions targeting lifestyle behaviours may improve health-related quality of life and physical function, and reduce depression, whereas little to no effect was achieved on physical activity and weight loss in people with multimorbidity. However, the evidence for physical activity and weight loss were of low quality and the end-treatment benefits diminished over time.

Benefits and Harms of Digital Health Interventions Promoting Physical Activity in People With Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions for managing chronic conditions have great potential. However, the benefits and harms are still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of digital health interventions in promoting physical activity in people with chronic conditions. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to October 2022. Eligible randomized controlled trials were included if they used a digital component in physical activity promotion in adults with ≥1 of the following conditions: depression or anxiety, ischemic heart disease or heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, knee or hip osteoarthritis, hypertension, or type 2 diabetes. The primary outcomes were objectively measured physical activity and physical function (eg, walk or step tests). We used a random effects model (restricted maximum likelihood) for meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses to assess the impact of study-level covariates. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: Of 14,078 hits, 130 randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with usual care or minimal intervention, digital health interventions increased objectively measured physical activity (end of intervention: standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.37; follow-up: SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.31) and physical function (end of intervention: SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-0.59; follow-up: SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.01-0.57). The secondary outcomes also favored the digital health interventions for subjectively measured physical activity and physical function, depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life at the end of the intervention but only subjectively measured physical activity at follow-up. The risk of nonserious adverse events, but not serious adverse events, was higher in the digital health interventions at the end of the intervention, but no difference was seen at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Digital health interventions improved physical activity and physical function across various chronic conditions. Effects on depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life were only observed at the end of the intervention. The risk of nonserious adverse events is present during the intervention, which should be addressed. Future studies should focus on better reporting, comparing the effects of different digital health solutions, and investigating how intervention effects are sustained beyond the end of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020189028; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189028.

Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament and meniscal injuries: a best-evidence synthesis of systematic reviews for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVE: Synthesise evidence for effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions following ACL and/or meniscal tear on symptomatic, functional, clinical, psychosocial, quality of life and reinjury outcomes. DESIGN: Overview of systematic reviews with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation certainty of evidence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and Cochrane Library. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials investigating rehabilitation interventions following ACL and/or meniscal tears in young adults. RESULTS: We included 22 systematic reviews (142 trials of mostly men) evaluating ACL-injured individuals and none evaluating isolated meniscal injuries. We synthesised data from 16 reviews evaluating 12 different interventions. Moderate-certainty evidence was observed for: (1) neuromuscular electrical stimulation to improve quadriceps strength; (2) open versus closed kinetic chain exercises to be similarly effective for quadriceps strength and self-reported function; (3) structured home-based versus structured in-person rehabilitation to be similarly effective for quadriceps and hamstring strength and self-reported function; and (4) postoperative knee bracing being ineffective for physical function and laxity. There was low-certainty evidence that: (1) preoperative exercise therapy improves self-reported and physical function postoperatively; (2) cryotherapy reduces pain and analgesic use; (3) psychological interventions improve anxiety/fear; and (4) whole body vibration improves quadriceps strength. There was very low-certainty evidence that: (1) protein-based supplements improve quadriceps size; (2) blood flow restriction training improves quadriceps size; (3) neuromuscular control exercises improve quadriceps and hamstring strength and self-reported function; and (4) continuous passive motion has no effect on range of motion. CONCLUSION: The general level of evidence for rehabilitation after ACL or meniscal tear was low. Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that several rehabilitation types can improve quadriceps strength, while brace use has no effect on knee function/laxity.

OPTIKNEE 2022: consensus recommendations to optimise knee health after traumatic knee injury to prevent osteoarthritis.

The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA.

Impact of exercise on articular cartilage in people at risk of, or with established, knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of knee joint loading exercise on articular cartilage in people at risk of, or with established, knee osteoarthritis (OA) by conducting a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: We performed a literature search with no restriction on publication year or language in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science up to September 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: RCTs investigating the impact of exercise on MRI-assessed articular cartilage in people over 18 years of age. RESULTS: We included nine trials, including a total of 14 comparisons of cartilage morphometry, morphology and composition outcomes, of which two included participants at increased risk of knee OA and 12 included participants with knee OA. In participants at increased risk, one study comparison reported no effect on cartilage defects and one had positive effects on glycosaminoglycans (GAG). In participants with OA, six study comparisons reported no effect on cartilage thickness, volume or defects; one reported a negative effect and one no effect on GAG; two reported a positive effect and two no effect on collagen. CONCLUSIONS: Knee joint loading exercise seems to not be harmful for articular cartilage in people at increased risk of, or with, knee OA. However, the quality of evidence was low, including some interventions studying activities considered outside the therapeutic loading spectrum to promote cartilage health.

Knee osteoarthritis risk is increased 4-6 fold after knee injury - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate knee osteoarthritis (OA) risk following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), meniscus or combined ACL and meniscus injury. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and Web of Science until November 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Prospective or retrospective studies with at least 2-year follow-up including adults with ACL injury, meniscal injury or combined injuries. Knee OA was defined by radiographs or clinical diagnosis and compared with the contralateral knee or non-injured controls. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS: Risk of bias was assessed using the SIGN50 checklist. ORs for developing knee OA were estimated using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: 53 studies totalling ∼1 million participants were included: 185 219 participants with ACL injury, mean age 28 years, 35% females, 98% surgically reconstructed; 83 267 participants with meniscal injury, mean age 38 years, 36% females, 22% confirmed meniscectomy and 73% unknown; 725 362 participants with combined injury, mean age 31 years, 26% females, 80% treated surgically. The OR of developing knee OA were 4.2 (95% CI 2.2 to 8.0; I2=92%), 6.3 (95% CI 3.8 to 10.5; I2=95%) and 6.4 (95% CI 4.9 to 8.3; I2=62%) for patients with ACL injury, meniscal injury and combined injuries, respectively. CONCLUSION: The odds of developing knee OA following ACL injury are approximately four times higher compared with a non-injured knee. A meniscal injury and a combined injury affecting both the ACL and meniscus are associated with six times higher odds compared with a non-injured knee. Large inconsistency (eg, study design, follow-up period and comparator) and few high-quality studies suggest that future studies may change these estimates. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients sustaining a major knee injury have a substantially increased risk of developing knee OA, highlighting the importance of knee injury prevention programmes and secondary prevention strategies to prevent or delay knee OA development.PROSPERO registration number CRD42015016900.

Association of osteoarthritis risk factors with knee and hip pain in a population-based sample of 29-59 year olds in Denmark: a cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to a) describe the prevalence of knee and hip osteoarthritis risk factors in a population of 29-59 year old individuals, b) estimate the association between persistent knee/hip pain and osteoarthritis risk factors, and c) describe the prevalence of osteoarthritis risk factors, including specific biomechanical risk factors, in individuals with prolonged persistent knee or hip pain. METHODS: Participants completed the "Early Detection and Prevention" pilot study questionnaire, including items on presence of knee/hip pain within the last month and osteoarthritis risk factors. Individuals reporting knee/hip problems completed a second questionnaire, including items about most problematic joint and specific biomechanical osteoarthritis risk factors. After describing the prevalence of persistent knee/hip pain and osteoarthritis risk factors among respondents stratified for sex and age, logistic regression was used to estimate the strength of associations between osteoarthritis risk factors and presence of knee/hip pain. The prevalence of prolonged persistent pain (i.e. knee/hip pain reported at both questionnaires) and osteoarthritis risk factors among respondents with prolonged persistent knee and hip pain, were described. RESULTS: Two thousand six hundred sixty-one respondents completed the first survey. The one-month prevalence of persistent knee/hip pain was 27%. Previous knee/hip injury was associated with persistent knee/hip pain for both sexes in all age groups, while a family history of osteoarthritis was associated with persistent knee/hip pain in all age groups except for 29-39 year old men. A higher BMI was associated with persistent knee/hip pain in 40-59 year old women, and 50-59 year old men. Eight hundred sixty seven respondents completed the second questionnaire. Knee/hip injuries and surgeries were more common in individuals with prolonged persistent knee than hip pain. CONCLUSIONS: Knee/hip pain within the last month was frequent among individuals aged 29-59 years. Multiple known osteoarthritis risk factors were associated with presence of knee/hip pain. Joint injury and previous surgery were more common in individuals with knee than hip pain. The results support the notion that joint injury and overweight during early adulthood are signs of a trajectory towards symptomatic osteoarthritis later in life and may help earlier identification of groups at high risk of future symptomatic osteoarthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02797392 ). Registered April 29,2016.

Childhood and adolescence physical activity and multimorbidity later in life: A systematic review.

Background: No systematic summary exists on childhood physical activity and later-life multimorbidity risks. We primarily investigated the association of physical activity in childhood and adolescence and the development of multimorbidity in adulthood. Secondarily, we examined whether physical activity level differ in children and adolescents with and without multimorbidity and whether there is a cross-sectional association between physical activity and multimorbidity. Methods: Following Cochrane Handbook guidelines and adhering to PRISMA recommendations, we included cross-sectional, case-control and longitudinal studies that investigated the association between physical activity in children and adolescents and development of multimorbidity. Results were summarized narratively and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42023407063. Results: Of 9064 studies identified, 11 were included in 13 papers. Longitudinals studies suggested that being physically active in childhood and adolescence was associated with a lower risk of multimorbidity in adulthood. Three out of five studies reported lower physical activity level in children and adolescents with multimorbidity compared to those without, and two did not find a between-group difference. Cross-sectional evidence on the association between multimorbidity and lower physical activity was uncertain. Overall, the evidence certainty for all outcomes was considered low due to the indirectness and inconsistency in findings. Conclusions: Childhood and adolescence physical activity appeared to be linked with a reduced risk of later-life multimorbidity but the certainty of the evidence is low. These results support the promotion of physical activity during childhood and adolescence.

Mapping interventional components and behavior change techniques used to promote self-management in people with multimorbidity: a scoping review.

Ageing populations and improved survival, have contributed to a rise in the number of people living with multimorbidity, raising issues related to polypharmacy, treatment burden, competing priorities and poor coordination of care. Self-management programs are increasingly included as an essential component of interventions to improve outcomes in this population. However, an overview of how interventions supporting self-management in patients with multimorbidity is missing. This scoping review focused on mapping the literature on patient-centered interventions for people living with multimorbidity. We searched several databases, clinical registries, and grey literature for RCTs published between 1990-2019 describing interventions that supported self-management in people with multimorbidity. We included 72 studies that were found to be very heterogeneous when it comes to the population, delivery modes and modalities, intervention elements and facilitators. The results pointed to an extensive use of cognitive behavioral therapy as a basis for interventions, as well as behavior change theories and disease management frameworks. The most coded behavior change techniques stemmed from the categories Social Support, Feedback and monitoring and Goals and Planning. To allow for implementation of effective interventions in clinical practice, improved reporting of intervention mechanisms in RCTs is warranted.

Tailoring CONSORT-SPI to improve the reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials: An expert consensus study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inadequate reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials is common and leads to significant challenges for researchers. The aim of this study was to tailor CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)-SPI (Social and Psychological Interventions) guidelines to improve reporting of trials of behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation. METHOD: Informed by missing data from the IC-SMOKE (Intervention and Comparison group support provided in SMOKing cEssation) systematic review project, this study used a multi-stage Delphi process to examine which items could be added or modified to improve the reporting of smoking cessation trials. The first stage involved an on-line survey of 17 international experts in smoking cessation and trial methodology voting on the importance of items for inclusion in the updated guidelines. This was followed by a face-to-face expert consensus meeting attended by 15 of these experts, where the final inclusion and exclusion of new items and modifications were agreed upon. A nine-point Likert scale was used to establish consensus, with suggested modifications requiring agreement of 75% or more. Disagreements in the first stage were presented again at the second stage for discussion and a second round of voting. Only items which reached the threshold for agreement were included. RESULTS: The experts agreed on the inclusion of 10 new items and the specification of 12 existing items. This included modifications that could apply to trials more widely (e.g. the rationale for the comparator), but also modifications that were very specific to smoking cessation trials (e.g. the reporting of smoking cessation outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: A Delphi study has developed a modified CONSORT-SPI guideline (CONSORT-SPI-SMOKE) to improve the reporting of trials of behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation.

Exercise Therapy for Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis: Is There An Ideal Prescription?

Purpose of review: Exercise therapy is the first line treatment for patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) but is consistently underutilized. In this review, we aim to provide health care professionals with an overview of the latest evidence in the areas of exercise therapy for OA, which can serve as a guide for incorporating the ideal exercise therapy prescription in the overall management plan for their patients with OA. Recent findings: Evidence continues to be produced supporting the use of exercise therapy for all patients with knee or hip OA. Ample evidence exists suggesting exercise therapy is a safe form of treatment, for both joint structures and the patient overall. Several systematic reviews show that exercise therapy is likely to improve patient outcomes, regardless of disease severity or comorbidities. However, no single type of exercise therapy is superior to others. Summary: Health care practitioners and patients should be encouraged to incorporate exercise therapy into treatment plans and can be assured of the safety profile and likelihood of improvement in important patient outcomes. Since no single exercise therapy program shows vastly superior benefit, patient preference and contextual factors should be central to the shared decision-making process when selecting and individualising appropriate exercise therapy prescriptions.

Personalised exercise therapy and self-management support for people with multimorbidity: feasibility of the MOBILIZE intervention.

BACKGROUND: Exercise therapy is safe and effective in people with single conditions, but the feasibility in people with two or more conditions is unclear. Therefore, the aim was to evaluate the feasibility of exercise therapy and self-management in people with multimorbidity prior to a randomised, controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: This was a mixed-methods feasibility study performed in two general hospitals and one psychiatric hospital. 20 adult patients (8 females; mean age (SD) 67 (6.9)) with at least two long-term conditions and a score of ≥ 3 on Disease Burden Impact Scale for at least one condition (at least moderate limitations of daily activities) and of ≥ 2 for at least one other condition. Patients with unstable health conditions, at risk of serious adverse events (SAE) or with terminal conditions were excluded. Participants received 12 weeks of exercise (18 60-min group-based and 6 home-based sessions) and self-management support (6 90-min group-based sessions) supervised by physiotherapists. Pre-defined progression to RCT criteria were the primary outcomes and included recruitment rate (acceptable 20 participants in 3 months), retention through follow-up (75% retention), compliance (75% complete > 9 of exercise and > 3 self-management sessions), outcome burden (80% do not find outcomes too burdensome), improvement in quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and function (6-min walk test; ≥ 50% experience clinically relevant improvements) and intervention-related SAEs (No SAEs). Furthermore, a purposeful sample including eleven participants and two facilitators were interviewed about their experiences of participating/facilitating. Qualitative data was analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Recruitment rate (20 in 49 days), retention (85%), outcome burden (95%), and SAEs (0 related to intervention) were acceptable, while compliance (70%) and improvements (35% in quality of life, 46% in function) were not (amendment needed before proceeding to RCT). The intervention was found acceptable by both participants and physiotherapists with some barriers among participants relating to managing multiple chronic conditions while caring for others or maintaining a job. Physiotherapists expressed a need for additional training. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise therapy and self-management are feasible in people with multimorbidity. The subsequent RCT, amending the intervention according to progression criteria and feedback, will determine whether the intervention is superior to usual care alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04645732 Open Science Framework https://osf.io/qk6yg/.

Physical activity and exercise therapy for people with multimorbidity.

Physical activity and exercise therapy appear safe and beneficial for people with multimorbidity and should therefore be considered in the prevention and management of multimorbidity, as argued in this review. General practitioners and specialists should refer people with multimorbidity to supervised exercise therapy (2-3 times/week for 8-12 weeks, strengthening or aerobic exercise or a combination), while encouraging and educating patients to improve physical activity to improve overall health by e.g., integrating physical activity in everyday-life practices such as gardening, transportation, and house chores.

Variability in effect sizes of exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis depending on comparator interventions.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis (OA) have largely ignored the variability in comparator interventions. OBJECTIVE: To assess how effect estimates of exercise therapy for knee OA as reported in randomized controlled trials vary depending on the comparator interventions. METHODS: We followed the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidance to conduct and report this meta-epidemiological study. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from systematic reviews published in 2015 or later and reference lists of included studies. Exercise therapy RCTs testing interventions that adhered to the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines compared to any comparator intervention in people with knee OA and reporting outcomes of knee pain, physical function and/or quadriceps strength at the end of intervention were included. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs with 2412 participants were included. Comparator interventions included no intervention, non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy, education/self-management, and passive modalities. For pain, standardized mean difference (SMD) for ACSM compliant exercise therapy compared to passive modalities was 1.76 (95% CI 0.49, 3.04), no intervention 0.93 (95% CI 0.50; 1.36), education/self-management 0.27 (95% CI 0.07, 0.47), and non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy 0.09 (95% CI -0.06, 0.23). For physical function, SMD for ACSM compliant exercise therapy compared to passive modalities was 1.29 (95% CI 0.41, 2.17), no intervention 0.76 (95% CI 0.15, 1.36), non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy 0.25 (95% CI -0.00, 0.51) and education/self-management 0.21 (95% CI -0.14, 0.55). For quadriceps strength, SMD for ACSM compliant exercise therapy compared to no intervention was 0.69 (95% CI 0.42, 0.96), non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy 0.23 (95% CI -0.01, 0.46), education/self-management -0.02 (95% CI -0.45, 0.42) and passive modalities 0.80 (95% CI -0.10, 1.71). CONCLUSION: The effect of exercise therapy for knee OA varies significantly depending on the comparator intervention. This variability should be assessed routinely in systematic reviews.