Acceptability of a nurse-led non-pharmacological complex intervention for knee pain: Nurse and patient views and experiences.

OBJECTIVES: The overall purpose of this research programme is to develop and test the feasibility of a complex intervention for knee pain delivered by a nurse, and comprising both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. In this first phase, we examined the acceptability of the non-pharmacological component of the intervention; issues faced in delivery, and resolved possible challenges to delivery. METHODS: Eighteen adults with chronic knee pain were recruited from the community. The intervention comprised holistic assessment, education, exercise, weight-loss advice (where appropriate) and advice on adjunctive treatments such as hot/cold treatments, footwear modification and walking aids. After nurse training, the intervention was delivered in four sessions spread over five weeks. Participants had one to one semi-structured interview at the end of the intervention. The nurse was interviewed after the last visit of the last participant. These were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes were identified by one author through framework analysis of the transcripts, and cross-checked by another. RESULTS: Most participants found the advice from the nurse easy to follow and were satisfied with the package, though some felt that too much information was provided too soon. The intervention changed their perception of managing knee pain, learning that it can be improved with self-management. However, participants thought that the most challenging part of the intervention was fitting the exercise regime into their daily routine. The nurse found discussion of goal setting to be challenging. CONCLUSION: The nurse-led package of care is acceptable within a research setting. The results are promising and will be applied in a feasibility randomised-controlled trial.

Efficacy and potential determinants of exercise therapy in knee and hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Exercise is an effective treatment for osteoarthritis. However, the effect may vary from one patient (or study) to another. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of exercise and its potential determinants for pain, function, performance, and quality of life (QoL) in knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: We searched 9 electronic databases (AMED, CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE Ovid, PEDro, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Google Scholar) for reports of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing exercise-only interventions with usual care. The search was performed from inception up to December 2017 with no language restriction. The effect size (ES), with its 95% confidence interval (CI), was calculated on the basis of between-group standardised mean differences. The primary endpoint was at or nearest to 8 weeks. Other outcome time points were grouped into intervals, from<1 month to≥18 months, for time-dependent effects analysis. Potential determinants were explored by subgroup analyses. Level of significance was set at P≤0.10. RESULTS: Data from 77 RCTs (6472 participants) confirmed statistically significant exercise benefits for pain (ES 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.68), function (0.50, 0.38-0.63), performance (0.46, 0.35-0.57), and QoL (0.21, 0.11-0.31) at or nearest to 8 weeks. Across all outcomes, the effects appeared to peak around 2 months and then gradually decreased and became no better than usual care after 9 months. Better pain relief was reported by trials investigating participants who were younger (mean age<60 years), had knee OA, and were not awaiting joint replacement surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise significantly reduces pain and improves function, performance and QoL in people with knee and hip OA as compared with usual care at 8 weeks. The effects are maximal around 2 months and thereafter slowly diminish, being no better than usual care at 9 to 18 months. Participants with younger age, knee OA and not awaiting joint replacement may benefit more from exercise therapy. These potential determinants, identified by study-level analyses, may have implied ecological bias and need to be confirmed with individual patient data.

Relative Efficacy of Different Exercises for Pain, Function, Performance and Quality of Life in Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend exercise as a core treatment for osteoarthritis (OA). However, it is unclear which type of exercise is most effective, leading to inconsistency between different recommendations. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to investigate the relative efficacy of different exercises (aerobic, mind-body, strengthening, flexibility/skill, or mixed) for improving pain, function, performance and quality of life (QoL) for knee and hip OA at, or nearest to, 8 weeks. METHODS: We searched nine electronic databases up until December 2017 for randomised controlled trials that compared exercise with usual care or with another exercise type. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to estimate the relative effect size (ES) and corresponding 95% credibility interval (CrI) (PROSPERO registration: CRD42016033865). FINDINGS: We identified and analysed 103 trials (9134 participants). Aerobic exercise was most beneficial for pain (ES 1.11; 95% CrI 0.69, 1.54) and performance (1.05; 0.63, 1.48). Mind-body exercise, which had pain benefit equivalent to that of aerobic exercise (1.11; 0.63, 1.59), was the best for function (0.81; 0.27, 1.36). Strengthening and flexibility/skill exercises improved multiple outcomes at a moderate level. Mixed exercise was the least effective for all outcomes and had significantly less pain relief than aerobic and mind-body exercises. The trend was significant for pain (p = 0.01), but not for function (p = 0.07), performance (p = 0.06) or QoL (p = 0.65). CONCLUSION: The effect of exercise varies according to the type of exercise and target outcome. Aerobic or mind-body exercise may be the best for pain and function improvements. Strengthening and flexibility/skill exercises may be used for multiple outcomes. Mixed exercise is the least effective and the reason for this merits further investigation.