My joint pain, a web-based resource, effects on education and quality of care at 24 months.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of the updated version of an evidence-based osteoarthritis (OA) resource and consumer hub, 'My Joint Pain' website, on health education and quality of care over 12 months. METHODS: Using a classic quasi-experimental design, participants with symptomatic hip or knee OA were recruited across Australia to evaluate the 'My Joint Pain' website, compared to a control group of non-users from 12 to 24 months. Outcome measures included the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (HEIQ) and the OA Quality Indicator (OAQI) questionnaire. The changes from 12 to 24 months in the HEIQ were evaluated using a generalised linear model. The differences between users and non-users in the OAQI were evaluated using a chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 277 eligible participants with symptomatic hip or knee OA were recruited at baseline, and 122 participants completed the 24-month surveys (users: n = 35, non-users: n = 87). There was no significant difference between users and non-users for the HEIQ scores at 24 months after adjustments for age, sex and body mass index (BMI). Users had higher emotional distress scores than non-users in univariable analysis. When compared with non-users in the OAQI, users showed favourable changes in receiving information about "self-management" and "acetaminophen" and "non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)" from 12 to 24 months. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of the updated 'My Joint Pain' website didn't find significant improvements in terms of health education, but it may help delivering useful information about self-management and appropriate use of pharmacological treatments. More strategies are needed to facilitate the uptake of evidence-based self-management and education online resources for OA consumers.

Prevalence and determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour before and up to 12 months after total knee replacement: a longitudinal cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the prevalence and determinants of inadequate physical activity and excessive sedentary behaviour before and after total knee replacement. DESIGN, SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Secondary analysis was performed on data from a cohort of 422 adults (45-74 years), drawn from 12 public or private hospitals, undergoing primary unilateral or bilateral total knee replacement surgery. MAIN MEASURES: Questionnaires were used to determine the presence of inadequate physical activity and excessive sedentary behaviour before and 6 and 12 months after total knee replacement surgery. Knee pain, activity limitations, comorbidities, muscle strength, psychological well-being, fatigue, sleep and body mass index were measured/assessed as possible determinants of physical activity or sedentary behaviour. RESULTS: Before surgery, 77% ( n = 326) of the cohort participated in inadequate physical activity according to World Health Organization guidelines, and 60% ( n = 253) engaged in excessive sedentary behaviour. Twelve months after surgery, 53% ( n = 185) of the cohort engaged in inadequate physical activity and 45% ( n = 157) in excessive sedentary behaviour. Inadequate physical activity before surgery ( P = 0.02), obesity ( P = 0.07) and comorbidity score >6 ( P = 0.04) predicted inadequate physical activity 12 months after surgery. Excessive sedentary behaviour and activity limitations before surgery predicted excessive sedentary behaviour 12 months after surgery. CONCLUSION: Although there were improvements after total knee replacement, 12 months after surgery about half the cohort did not meet World Health Organization recommendations for activity. Pre-surgery assessment of physical activity, activity limitations, sedentary behaviour and body mass index is essential to identify patients at risk for long-term inactivity.

The Ottawa panel clinical practice guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis. Part one: introduction, and mind-body exercise programs.

OBJECTIVE: To identify effective mind-body exercise programs and provide clinicians and patients with updated, high-quality recommendations concerning non-traditional land-based exercises for knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: A systematic search and adapted selection criteria included comparative controlled trials with mind-body exercise programs for patients with knee osteoarthritis. A panel of experts reached consensus on the recommendations using a Delphi survey. A hierarchical alphabetical grading system (A, B, C+, C, D, D+, D-) was used, based on statistical significance ( P < 0.5) and clinical importance (⩾15% improvement). RESULTS: The four high-quality studies identified demonstrated that various mind-body exercise programs are promising for improving the management of knee osteoarthritis. Hatha Yoga demonstrated significant improvement for pain relief (Grade B) and physical function (Grade C+). Tai Chi Qigong demonstrated significant improvement for quality of life (Grade B), pain relief (Grade C+) and physical function (Grade C+). Sun style Tai Chi gave significant improvement for pain relief (Grade B) and physical function (Grade B). CONCLUSION: Mind-body exercises are promising approaches to reduce pain, as well as to improve physical function and quality of life for individuals with knee osteoarthritis.

The Ottawa panel clinical practice guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis. Part three: aerobic exercise programs.

OBJECTIVES: To identify effective aerobic exercise programs and provide clinicians and patients with updated, high-quality recommendations concerning traditional land-based exercises for knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: A systematic search and adapted selection criteria included comparative controlled trials with strengthening exercise programs for patients with knee osteoarthritis. A panel of experts reached consensus on the recommendations using a Delphi survey. A hierarchical alphabetical grading system (A, B, C+, C, D, D+, or D-) was used, based on statistical significance ( P < 0.5) and clinical importance (⩾15% improvement). RESULTS: The five high-quality studies included demonstrated that various aerobic training exercises are generally effective for improving knee osteoarthritis within a 12-week period. An aerobic exercise program demonstrated significant improvement for pain relief (Grade B), physical function (Grade B) and quality of life (Grade C+). Aerobic exercise in combination with strengthening exercises showed significant improvement for pain relief (3 Grade A) and physical function (2 Grade A, 2 Grade B). CONCLUSION: A short-term aerobic exercise program with/without muscle strengthening exercises is promising for reducing pain, improving physical function and quality of life for individuals with knee osteoarthritis.

The Ottawa panel clinical practice guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis. Part two: strengthening exercise programs.

OBJECTIVE: To identify effective strengthening exercise programs and provide rehabilitation teams and patients with updated, high-quality recommendations concerning traditional land-based exercises for knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: A systematic search and adapted selection criteria included comparative controlled trials with strengthening exercise programs for patients with knee osteoarthritis. A panel of experts reached consensus on the recommendations using a Delphi survey. A hierarchical alphabetical grading system (A, B, C+, C, D, D+ or D-) was based on statistical significance ( p < 0.5) and clinical importance (⩾15% improvement). RESULTS: The 26 high-quality studies identified demonstrated that various strengthening exercise programs with/without other types of therapeutic exercises are generally effective for improving knee osteoarthritis management within a six-month period. Strengthening exercise programs demonstrated a significant improvement for pain relief (four Grade A, ten Grade B, two Grade C+), physical function (four Grade A, eight Grade B) and quality of life (three Grade B). Strengthening in combination with other types of exercises (coordination, balance, functional) showed a significant improvement in pain relief (three Grade A, 11 Grade B, eight Grade C+), physical function (two Grade A, four Grade B, three Grade C+) and quality of life (one Grade A, one Grade C+). CONCLUSION: There are a variety of choices for strengthening exercise programs with positive recommendations for healthcare professionals and knee osteoarthritis patients. There is a need to develop combined behavioral and muscle-strengthening strategies to improve long-term maintenance of regular strengthening exercise programs.

Ottawa Panel evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for therapeutic exercise in the management of hip osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to identify effective land-based therapeutic exercise interventions and provide evidence-based recommendations for managing hip osteoarthritis. A secondary objective is to develop an Ottawa Panel evidence-based clinical practice guideline for hip osteoarthritis. METHODS: The search strategy and modified selection criteria from a Cochrane review were used. Studies included hip osteoarthritis patients in comparative controlled trials with therapeutic exercise interventions. An Expert Panel arrived at a Delphi survey consensus to endorse the recommendations. The Ottawa Panel hierarchical alphabetical grading system (A, B, C+, C, D, D+, or D-) considered the study design (level I: randomized controlled trial and level II: controlled clinical trial), statistical significance (p < 0.5), and clinical importance (⩾15% improvement). RESULTS: Four high-quality studies were included, which demonstrated that variations of strength training, stretching, and flexibility exercises are generally effective for improving the management of hip osteoarthritis. Strength training exercises displayed the greatest improvements for pain (Grade A), disability (Grades A and C+), physical function (Grade A), stiffness (Grade A), and range of motion (Grade A) within a short time period (8-24 weeks). Stretching also greatly improved physical function (Grade A), and flexibility exercises improved pain (Grade A), range of motion (Grade A), physical function (Grade A), and stiffness (Grade C+). CONCLUSION: The Ottawa Panel recommends land-based therapeutic exercise, notably strength training, for management of hip osteoarthritis in reducing pain, stiffness and self-reported disability, and improving physical function and range of motion.

Glucosamine and chondroitin for knee osteoarthritis: a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating single and combination regimens.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the dietary supplements, glucosamine and/or chondroitin, result in reduced joint space narrowing (JSN) and pain among people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: A double-blind randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. 605 participants, aged 45-75 years, reporting chronic knee pain and with evidence of medial tibio-femoral compartment narrowing (but retaining >2 mm medial joint space width) were randomised to once daily: glucosamine sulfate 1500 mg (n=152), chondroitin sulfate 800 mg (n=151), both dietary supplements (n=151) or matching placebo capsules (n=151). JSN (mm) over 2 years was measured from digitised knee radiographs. Maximum knee pain (0-10) was self-reported in a participant diary for 7 days every 2 months over 1 year. RESULTS: After adjusting for factors associated with structural disease progression (gender, body mass index (BMI), baseline structural disease severity and Heberden's nodes), allocation to the dietary supplement combination (glucosamine-chondroitin) resulted in a statistically significant (p=0.046) reduction of 2-year JSN compared to placebo: mean difference 0.10 mm (95% CI 0.002 mm to 0.20 mm); no significant structural effect for the single treatment allocations was detected. All four allocation groups demonstrated reduced knee pain over the first year, but no significant between-group differences (p=0.93) were detected. 34 (6%) participants reported possibly-related adverse medical events over the 2-year follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Allocation to the glucosamine-chondroitin combination resulted in a statistically significant reduction in JSN at 2 years. While all allocation groups demonstrated reduced knee pain over the study period, none of the treatment allocation groups demonstrated significant symptomatic benefit above placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00513422; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a major public health issue because it causes chronic pain, reduces physical function and diminishes quality of life. Ageing of the population and increased global prevalence of obesity are anticipated to dramatically increase the prevalence of knee OA and its associated impairments. No cure for knee OA is known, but exercise therapy is among the dominant non-pharmacological interventions recommended by international guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with knee OA in terms of reduced joint pain or improved physical function and quality of life. SEARCH METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched, up until May 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) randomly assigning individuals and comparing groups treated with some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercise conducted in the water) with a non-exercise group or a non-treatment control group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three teams of two review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias for each study and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. We conducted analyses on continuous outcomes (pain, physical function and quality of life) immediately after treatment and on dichotomous outcomes (proportion of study withdrawals) at the end of the study; we also conducted analyses on the sustained effects of exercise on pain and function (two to six months, and longer than six months). MAIN RESULTS: In total, we extracted data from 54 studies. Overall, 19 (20%) studies reported adequate random sequence generation and allocation concealment and adequately accounted for incomplete outcome data; we considered these studies to have an overall low risk of bias. Studies were largely free from selection bias, but research results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias, as only four of the RCTs reported blinding of participants to treatment allocation, and, although most RCTs reported blinded outcome assessment, pain, physical function and quality of life were participant self-reported.High-quality evidence from 44 trials (3537 participants) indicates that exercise reduced pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to -0.59) immediately after treatment. Pain was estimated at 44 points on a 0 to 100-point scale (0 indicated no pain) in the control group; exercise reduced pain by an equivalent of 12 points (95% CI 10 to 15 points). Moderate-quality evidence from 44 trials (3913 participants) showed that exercise improved physical function (SMD -0.52, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.64) immediately after treatment. Physical function was estimated at 38 points on a 0 to 100-point scale (0 indicated no loss of physical function) in the control group; exercise improved physical function by an equivalent of 10 points (95% CI 8 to 13 points). High-quality evidence from 13 studies (1073 participants) revealed that exercise improved quality of life (SMD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.40) immediately after treatment. Quality of life was estimated at 43 points on a 0 to 100-point scale (100 indicated best quality of life) in the control group; exercise improved quality of life by an equivalent of 4 points (95% CI 2 to 5 points).High-quality evidence from 45 studies (4607 participants) showed a comparable likelihood of withdrawal from exercise allocation (event rate 14%) compared with the control group (event rate 15%), and this difference was not significant: odds ratio (OR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.15). Eight studies reported adverse events, all of which were related to increased knee or low back pain attributed to the exercise intervention provided. No study reported a serious adverse event.In addition, 12 included studies provided two to six-month post-treatment sustainability data on 1468 participants for knee pain and on 1279 (10 studies) participants for physical function. These studies indicated sustainability of treatment effect for pain (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.14), with an equivalent reduction of 6 (3 to 9) points on 0 to 100-point scale, and of physical function (SMD -0.15 95% CI -0.26 to -0.04), with an equivalent improvement of 3 (1 to 5) points on 0 to 100-point scale.Marked variability was noted across included studies among participants recruited, symptom duration, exercise interventions assessed and important aspects of study methodology. Individually delivered programmes tended to result in greater reductions in pain and improvements in physical function, compared to class-based exercise programmes or home-based programmes; however between-study heterogeneity was marked within the individually provided treatment delivery subgroup. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: High-quality evidence indicates that land-based therapeutic exercise provides short-term benefit that is sustained for at least two to six months after cessation of formal treatment in terms of reduced knee pain, and moderate-quality evidence shows improvement in physical function among people with knee OA. The magnitude of the treatment effect would be considered moderate (immediate) to small (two to six months) but comparable with estimates reported for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Confidence intervals around demonstrated pooled results for pain reduction and improvement in physical function do not exclude a minimal clinically important treatment effect. Since the participants in most trials were aware of their treatment, this may have contributed to their improvement. Despite the lack of blinding we did not downgrade the quality of evidence for risk of performance or detection bias. This reflects our belief that further research in this area is unlikely to change the findings of our review.

The Web-Based Osteoarthritis Management Resource My Joint Pain Improves Quality of Care: A Quasi-Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines for conservative treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), management is often confined to the use of analgesics and waiting for eventual total joint replacement. This suggests a gap in knowledge for persons with OA regarding the many different treatments available to them. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate outcomes after usage of a Web-based resource called My Joint Pain that contains tailored, evidence-based information and tools aimed to improve self-management of OA on self-management and change in knowledge. METHODS: A quasi-experimental design was used to evaluate the My Joint Pain website intervention over a 12-month period. The intervention provided participants with general and user-specific information, monthly assessments with validated instruments, and progress-tracking tools. A nationwide convenience sample of 195 participants with self-assessed hip and/or knee OA completed both baseline and 12-month questionnaires (users: n=104; nonusers: n=91). The primary outcome measure was the Health Evaluation Impact Questionnaire (heiQ) to evaluate 8 different domains (health-directed activity, positive and active engagement in life, emotional distress, self-monitoring and insight, constructive attitudes and approaches, skill and technique acquisition, social integration and support, health service navigation) and the secondary outcome measure was the 17-item Osteoarthritis Quality Indicator (OAQI) questionnaire to evaluate the change in appropriateness of care received by participants. Independent t tests were used to compare changes between groups for the heiQ and chi-square tests to identify changes within and between groups from baseline to 12 months for each OAQI item. RESULTS: Baseline demographics between groups were similar for gender (152/195, 77.9% female), age (mean 60, SD 9 years) and body mass index (mean 31.1, SD 6.8 kg/m(2)). With the exception of health service navigation, mean effect sizes from all other heiQ domains showed a positive trend for My Joint Pain users compared to the nonusers, although the differences between groups did not reach statistical significance. Within-group changes also showed improvements among the users of the My Joint Pain website for self-management (absolute change score=15%, P=.03), lifestyle (absolute change score=16%, P=.02), and physical activity (absolute change score=11%, P=.04), with no significant improvements for the nonusers. Following 12 months of exposure to the website, there were significant improvements for users compared to nonusers in self-management (absolute change score 15% vs 2%, P=.001) and weight reduction (absolute change scores 3% vs -6%, P=.03) measured on the OAQI. CONCLUSIONS: The My Joint Pain Web resource does not significantly improve overall heiQ, but does improve other important aspects of quality of care in people with hip and/or knee OA. Further work is required to improve engagement with the website and the quality of information delivered in order to provide a greater impact.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee: a Cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) in terms of reduced joint pain or improved physical function and quality of life. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched, up until May 2013. Randomised clinical trials comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise with a non-exercise control were selected. Three teams of two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for each study. Standardised mean differences immediately after treatment and 2-6 months after cessation of formal treatment were separately pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS: In total, 54 studies were identified. Overall, 19 (35%) studies reported adequate random sequence generation, allocation concealment and adequately accounted for incomplete outcome data. However, research results may be vulnerable to selection, attrition and detection bias. Pooled results from 44 trials indicated that exercise significantly reduced pain (12 points/100; 95% CI 10 to 15) and improved physical function (10 points/100; 95% CI 8 to 13) to a moderate degree immediately after treatment, while evidence from 13 studies revealed that exercise significantly improved quality of life immediately after treatment with small effect (4 points/100; 95% CI 2 to 5). In addition, 12 studies provided 2-month to 6-month post-treatment sustainability data which showed significantly reduced knee pain (6 points/100; 95% CI 3 to 9) and 10 studies which showed improved physical function (3 points/100; 95% CI 1 to 5). CONCLUSIONS: Among people with knee osteoarthritis, land-based therapeutic exercise provides short-term benefit that is sustained for at least 2-6 months after cessation of formal treatment.

The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the global burden of disease 2010 study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study and to explore how the burden of hip and knee OA compares with other conditions. METHODS: Systematic reviews were conducted to source age-specific and sex-specific epidemiological data for hip and knee OA prevalence, incidence and mortality risk. The prevalence and incidence of symptomatic, radiographic and self-reported hip or knee OA were included. Three levels of severity were defined to derive disability weights (DWs) and severity distribution (proportion with mild, moderate and severe OA). The prevalence by country and region was multiplied by the severity distribution and the appropriate disability weight to calculate years of life lived with disability (YLDs). As there are no deaths directly attributed to OA, YLDs equate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). RESULTS: Globally, of the 291 conditions, hip and knee OA was ranked as the 11th highest contributor to global disability and 38th highest in DALYs. The global age-standardised prevalence of knee OA was 3.8% (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 3.6% to 4.1%) and hip OA was 0.85% (95% UI 0.74% to 1.02%), with no discernible change from 1990 to 2010. Prevalence was higher in females than males. YLDs for hip and knee OA increased from 10.5 million in 1990 (0.42% of total DALYs) to 17.1 million in 2010 (0.69% of total DALYs). CONCLUSIONS: Hip and knee OA is one of the leading causes of global disability. Methodological issues within this study make it highly likely that the real burden of OA has been underestimated. With the aging and increasing obesity of the world's population, health professions need to prepare for a large increase in the demand for health services to treat hip and knee OA.

The global burden of musculoskeletal conditions for 2010: an overview of methods.

The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of methods used for estimating the burden from musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions in the Global Burden of Diseases 2010 study. It should be read in conjunction with the disease-specific MSK papers published in Annals of Rheumatic Diseases. Burden estimates (disability-adjusted life years (DALYs)) were made for five specific MSK conditions: hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA), low back pain (LBP), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), gout and neck pain, and an 'other MSK conditions' category. For each condition, the main disabling sequelae were identified and disability weights (DW) were derived based on short lay descriptions. Mortality (years of life lost (YLLs)) was estimated for RA and the rest category of 'other MSK', which includes a wide range of conditions such as systemic lupus erythematosus, other autoimmune diseases and osteomyelitis. A series of systematic reviews were conducted to determine the prevalence, incidence, remission, duration and mortality risk of each condition. A Bayesian meta-regression method was used to pool available data and to predict prevalence values for regions with no or scarce data. The DWs were applied to prevalence values for 1990, 2005 and 2010 to derive years lived with disability. These were added to YLLs to quantify overall burden (DALYs) for each condition. To estimate the burden of MSK disease arising from risk factors, population attributable fractions were determined for bone mineral density as a risk factor for fractures, the occupational risk of LBP and elevated body mass index as a risk factor for LBP and OA. Burden of Disease studies provide pivotal guidance for governments when determining health priority areas and allocating resources. Rigorous methods were used to derive the increasing global burden of MSK conditions.

Responsiveness of quantitative cartilage measures over one year in knee osteoarthritis: comparison of radiography and MRI assessments.

PURPOSE: To directly compare the responsiveness of quantitative imaging measures of disease progression in knee osteoarthritis (OA). In the medial compartment of the knee comparison was made between: 1) radiographic joint space narrowing (JSN); 2) global quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (qMRI) of cartilage volume; 3) regional qMRI of cartilage thickness; and 4) regional analysis using an ordered value (OV) methodology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 3T MRI and weight-bearing radiography of the knees were performed at baseline and 1-year timepoints in 23 subjects (mean age 63 years) with symptomatic knee OA. Standardized response means (SRM) were calculated for each measure. Statistical analysis to determine significance of change between timepoints was performed with a two-tailed Student's t-test (JSN, global, regional analysis) and nonparametric Mann-Whitney test (ordered values). RESULTS: At 1 year, global cartilage volume losses of 2.3% (SRM -0.44) in the medial tibia and 6.9% in the medial femur (SRM -0.74) were recorded. SRM for JSN was -0.46. Regional analysis revealed largest reductions in cartilage thickness in the external (SRM -0.84) weight-bearing subregion of the medial femur and in the posterior subregion of the medial tibia (SRM -0.79). OV analysis in the medial compartment revealed areas of cartilage thinning (four ranked OV) and cartilage thickening (two ranked OV). CONCLUSION: The MRI OV approach proved to be a superior analysis tool for detecting changes in cartilage morphology over a 1-year period. Radiographically defined JSN was found to be the least responsive measurement method of knee OA disease progression.

Burden of reduced work productivity among people with chronic knee pain: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this systematic review were to determine the prevalence of reduced work productivity among people with chronic knee pain as well as specifically categorise determinants of work productivity losses into individual, disease and work-related factors, conduct an evaluation of study methodological quality and present a best-evidence synthesis. METHODS: We searched the literature using combinations of key words such as knee pain, knee osteoarthritis, absenteeism (days taken off work) and presenteeism (reduced productivity while at work) for observational studies published in English. Methodological quality appraisal and a best-evidence synthesis were used to pool the study findings. RESULTS: The studies were conducted exclusively in high income countries of North America, Western Europe and Hong Kong. 17 studies were included in the review, 10 measuring absenteeism and six measuring presenteeism. Of the 10 studies reporting absenteeism, seven found a 12-month absenteeism prevalence ranging from 5% to 22%. Only two studies evaluated presenteeism prevalence and reported a range from 66% to 71%. Using best-evidence synthesis: three high quality cohort studies and three cross-sectional studies provided strong evidence that knee pain or knee osteoarthritis was associated with absenteeism; two high quality cross-sectional studies and one cohort study provided limited evidence for an association with presenteeism; one cross-sectional study provided limited evidence for an association among age, high job demands and low coworker support and absenteeism among nurses with knee pain. No studies examined individual or work-related factors associated with presenteeism. CONCLUSIONS: A number of high quality studies consistently demonstrated that chronic knee pain or knee osteoarthritis is associated with absenteeism. However, data are lacking regarding presenteeism and individual or work-related risk factors for reduced work productivity among older workers with chronic knee pain. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO registry number: CRD42013004137.

A longitudinal study of knee pain in older men: Concord Health and Ageing in Men Project.

BACKGROUND: chronic knee pain is still considered a fairly benign disease by many, an 'unavoidable' consequence of ageing. This passive acceptance may be unnecessarily exposing older people to disability and serious co-morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine the disease burden associated with chronic knee pain and the role of knee extensor strength as a modifiable risk factor. METHODS: a longitudinal cohort study with 2-year follow-up conducted among 1,587 community-dwelling men aged 70 years and over, 637 (40%) reported chronic knee pain. Of the 950 (60%) men without knee pain at baseline, 768 (81%) returned for the follow-up assessment with 150 (20%) reporting incident chronic knee pain. RESULTS: knee pain was significantly associated with marked mobility disability [odds ratio (OR) 2.38; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.74-3.29], falls (OR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.01-1.70) and having four or more co-morbidity (OR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.16-2.30) as well as reduced knee extensor strength and mass (dual X-ray absorptiometry). Men with incident knee pain at the 2-year follow-up assessment demonstrated greater increases in these measures of disease burden and greater decreases in muscle strength and mass, compared with those without incident chronic knee pain. Obesity, high co-morbidity burden, back pain, higher levels of physical activity or low knee extensor strength were all significant risk factors for incident knee pain. CONCLUSION: prevention of chronic knee pain may reduce a considerable burden of mobility disability and increased risk of serious co-morbidity among older men.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the hip.

BACKGROUND: Current international treatment guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis (OA) report are based on limited evidence. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with hip OA in terms of reduced joint pain and improved physical function and quality of life. SEARCH METHODS: We searched five databases from inception up to February 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting people with hip OA and comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercises conducted in water) with a non-exercise group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently selected studies for inclusion. We resolved disagreements through consensus. Two review authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias and the quality of the body of evidence for each outcome using the GRADE approach. We conducted analyses on continuous outcomes (pain, physical function and quality of life) and dichotomous outcomes (proportion of study withdrawals). MAIN RESULTS: We considered that seven of the 10 included RCTs had a low risk of bias. However, the results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias as none of the RCTs were able to blind participants to treatment allocation and, while most RCTs reported blinded outcome assessment, pain, physical function and quality of life were participant self reported. One of the 10 RCTs was only reported as a conference abstract and did not provide sufficient data for the evaluation of bias risk.High-quality evidence from nine trials (549 participants) indicated that exercise reduced pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.55 to -0.20) and improved physical function (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.05) immediately after treatment. Pain and physical function were estimated to be 29 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no pain or loss of physical function) in the control group; exercise reduced pain by an equivalent of 8 points (95% CI 4 to 11 points; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6) and improved physical function by an equivalent of 7 points (95% CI 1 to 12 points; NNTB 6). Only three small studies (183 participants) evaluated quality of life, with overall low quality evidence, with no benefit of exercise demonstrated (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.36). Quality of life was estimated to be 50 points on a norm-based mean (standard deviation (SD)) score of 50 (10) in the general population in the control group; exercise improved quality of life by 0 points. Moderate-quality evidence from seven trials (715 participants) indicated an increased likelihood of withdrawal from the exercise allocation (event rate 6%) compared with the control group (event rate 3%), but this difference was not significant (risk difference 1%; 95% CI -1% to 4%). Of the five studies reporting adverse events, each study reported only one or two events and all were related to increased pain attributed to the exercise programme.The reduction in pain was sustained at least three to six months after ceasing monitored treatment (five RCTs, 391 participants): pain (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.18). Pain was estimated to be 29 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no pain) in the control group, the improvement in pain translated to a sustained reduction in pain intensity of 8 points (95% CI 4 to 12 points) compared with the control group (0 to 100 scale). The improvement in physical function was also sustained (five RCTs, 367 participants): physical function (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.16). Physical function was estimated to be 24 points on a 0- to 100-point scale (0 was no loss of physical function) in the control group, the improvement translated to a mean of 7 points (95% CI 4 to 13) compared with the control group.Only five of the 10 RCTs exclusively recruited people with symptomatic hip OA (419 participants). There was no significant difference in pain or physical function outcomes compared with five studies recruiting participants with hip or knee OA (130 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Pooling the results of these 10 RCTs demonstrated that land-based therapeutic exercise programmes can reduce pain and improve physical function among people with symptomatic hip OA.

Femoral nerve blocks for acute postoperative pain after knee replacement surgery.

BACKGROUND: Total knee replacement (TKR) is a common and often painful operation. Femoral nerve block (FNB) is frequently used for postoperative analgesia. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and risks of FNB used as a postoperative analgesic technique relative to other analgesic techniques among adults undergoing TKR. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2013, Issue 1, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, dissertation abstracts and reference lists of included studies. The date of the last search was 31 January 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing FNB with no FNB (intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) opioid, epidural analgesia, local infiltration analgesia, and oral analgesia) in adults after TKR. We also included RCTs that compared continuous versus single-shot FNB. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. We undertook meta-analysis (random-effects model) and used relative risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes. We interpreted SMDs according to rule of thumb where 0.2 or smaller represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect and 0.8 or larger, a large effect. MAIN RESULTS: We included 45 eligible RCTs (2710 participants) from 47 publications; 20 RCTs had more than two allocation groups. A total of 29 RCTs compared FNB (with or without concurrent treatments including PCA opioid) versus PCA opioid, 10 RCTs compared FNB versus epidural, five RCTs compared FNB versus local infiltration analgesia, one RCT compared FNB versus oral analgesia and four RCTs compared continuous versus single-shot FNB. Most included RCTs were rated as low or unclear risk of bias for the aspects rated in the risk of bias assessment tool, except for the aspect of blinding. We rated 14 (31%) RCTs at high risk for both participant and assessor blinding and rated eight (18%) RCTs at high risk for one blinding aspect.Pain at rest and pain on movement were less for FNB (of any type) with or without a concurrent PCA opioid compared with PCA opioid alone during the first 72 hours post operation. Pooled results demonstrated a moderate effect of FNB for pain at rest at 24 hours (19 RCTs, 1066 participants, SMD -0.72, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.51, moderate-quality evidence) and a moderate to large effect for pain on movement at 24 hours (17 RCTs, 1017 participants, SMD -0.94, 95% CI -1.32 to -0.55, moderate-quality evidence). Pain was also less in each FNB subgroup: single-shot FNB, continuous FNB and continuous FNB + sciatic block, compared with PCA. FNB also was associated with lower opioid consumption (IV morphine equivalent) at 24 hours (20 RCTs, 1156 participants, MD -14.74 mg, 95% CI -18.68 to -10.81 mg, high-quality evidence) and at 48 hours (MD -14.53 mg, 95% CI -20.03 to -9.02 mg), lower risk of nausea and/or vomiting (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.68, number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) four, high-quality evidence), greater knee flexion (11 RCTs, 596 participants, MD 6.48 degrees, 95% CI 4.27 to 8.69 degrees, moderate-quality evidence) and greater patient satisfaction (four RCTs, 180 participants, SMD 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.38, low-quality evidence) compared with PCA.We could not demonstrate a difference in pain between FNB (any type) and epidural analgesia in the first 72 hours post operation, including pain at 24 hours at rest (six RCTs, 328 participants, SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.32, moderate-quality evidence) and on movement (six RCTs, 317 participants, SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.24, high-quality evidence). No difference was noted at 24 hours for opioid consumption (five RCTs, 341 participants, MD -4.35 mg, 95% CI -9.95 to 1.26 mg, high-quality evidence) or knee flexion (six RCTs, 328 participants, MD -1.65, 95% CI -5.14 to 1.84, high-quality evidence). However, FNB demonstrated lower risk of nausea/vomiting (four RCTs, 183 participants, RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97, NNTH 8, moderate-quality evidence) and higher patient satisfaction (two RCTs, 120 participants, SMD 0.60, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.97, low-quality evidence), compared with epidural analgesia.Pooled results of four studies (216 participants) comparing FNB with local infiltration analgesia detected no difference in analgesic effects between the groups at 24 hours for pain at rest (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.72, moderate-quality evidence) or pain on movement (SMD 0.38, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.86, low-quality evidence). Only one included RCT compared FNB with oral analgesia. We considered this evidence insufficient to allow judgement of the effects of FNB compared with oral analgesia.Continuous FNB provided less pain compared with single-shot FNB (four RCTs, 272 participants) at 24 hours at rest (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.07, moderate-quality evidence) and on movement (SMD -0.42, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.17, high-quality evidence). Continuous FNB also demonstrated lower opioid consumption compared with single-shot FNB at 24 hours (three RCTs, 236 participants, MD -13.81 mg, 95% CI -23.27 to -4.35 mg, moderate-quality evidence).Generally, the meta-analyses demonstrated considerable statistical heterogeneity, with type of FNB, allocation concealment and blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessors reducing heterogeneity in the analyses. Available evidence was insufficient to allow determination of the comparative safety of the various analgesic techniques. Few RCTs reported on serious adverse effects such as neurological injury, postoperative falls or thrombotic events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Following TKR, FNB (with or without concurrent treatments including PCA opioid) provided more effective analgesia than PCA opioid alone, similar analgesia to epidural analgesia and less nausea/vomiting compared with PCA alone or epidural analgesia. The review also found that continuous FNB provided better analgesia compared with single-shot FNB. RCTs were insufficient to allow definitive conclusions on the comparison between FNB and local infiltration analgesia or oral analgesia.

Use of 3T MRI and an unspoiled 3D fast gradient echo sequence for porcine knee cartilage volumetry: preliminary findings.

PURPOSE: To assess the utility of knee cartilage volumetry using an unspoiled fat-suppressed 3D fast gradient echo (FGRE) sequence at 3T. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sagittal magnetic resonance (MR) images were obtained with an unspoiled fat-suppressed 3D FGRE sequence in eight porcine knees. Manual segmentation was used to derive the cartilage volume. This volume was compared to a volume measurement of cartilage scraping specimens obtained by water displacement. Imaging was repeated five times in four of the knees to assess interscan volume measurement reproducibility and calculate precision error. A single 3D dataset was manually segmented five times at weekly intervals to assess intraobserver volume measurement reproducibility. RESULTS: Total cartilage volume obtained from MRI and water displacement correlated well (r = 0.75). The interscan reproducibility of total volume measurements, expressed as the coefficient of variation (CV), was 4.2%, and the precision error (root mean square [RMS] CV) was 4.1%. The CV of intraobserver estimates of total cartilage volume by MRI was 3.6%. CONCLUSION: Interscan reproducibility of quantification of total cartilage volume and reproducibility of the manual segmentation technique were both high (>95%). Accurate and reproducible cartilage volumetry can be obtained by using a clinical unspoiled fat-suppressed 3D FGRE acquired at 3T MRI.

WITHDRAWN: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for preventing heterotopic bone formation after hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Heterotopic bone formation (HBF) in the soft tissues surrounding the hip joint is a frequent complication of hip surgery. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) administered in the immediate perioperative period reduce the risk of HBF. However, the magnitude of the effect on HBF, and the effects on other associated outcomes, such as pain and physical function, are uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of perioperative NSAID therapy versus control on the risk of HBF and other outcomes in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group specialised register (October 2002), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library issue 3, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2002), EMBASE (1988 to 2002 Week 43), CURRENT CONTENTS (1993 Week 27 to 2002 Week 44) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted trialists and drug manufacturers. SELECTION CRITERIA: All trials which enrolled patients scheduled to undergo hip arthroplasty with random or quasi-random allocation to perioperative NSAID or control and that recorded post-operative radiographically determined HBF. The primary outcome was post-operative radiographic HBF. Secondary outcomes were pain, function (including range of motion), gastro-intestinal and other bleeding complications, and other causes of major morbidity or mortality. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data. All analyses were conducted on dichotomised outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen randomised and two quasi-randomised trials involving a total of 4,763 patients were included. Overall, in 17 trials that examined the effects of medium to high doses of NSAIDs, there was a reduced risk of developing HBF after hip surgery (59% reduction, 95% confidence interval 54% to 64% reduction). In contrast, one large trial examining low-dose aspirin, demonstrated no effect on the risk of HBF (2% reduction, 95% confidence interval 15% reduction to 12% increase). There was strong evidence of differences in the size of the treatment effects observed between the trials examining medium to high doses of NSAIDs, but reasons were not clearly identified.There was a non-significant one third increased risk of gastro-intestinal side effects among patients assigned NSAIDs (29% increase, 95% confidence interval 0% to 76% increase). Most of this increase was due to an increased risk of minor gastro-intestinal complications. Data on the late post-operative outcomes of pain, impaired physical function and range of joint movement were few and no formal overviews of the effects of NSAIDs on these outcomes were possible. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative NSAIDs, apart from low dose aspirin, appear to produce between a one half and two thirds reduction in the risk of HBF. With routine use, such agents may be able to prevent 15-20 cases of HBF among every 100 total hip replacements performed. However, while medium to high doses of perioperative NSAIDs clearly produce a substantial reduction in the incidence of radiographic HBF, there remains some uncertainty about short-term side effects of treatment and substantial uncertainty about effects on long-term clinical outcomes such as chronic pain and impaired physical function. The net effect of routine HBF prophylaxis with NSAIDs requires formal assessment in a randomised trial designed to determine the balance of benefits and risks for all outcomes.

Patient preferences for adherence to treatment for osteoarthritis: the MEdication Decisions in Osteoarthritis Study (MEDOS).

BACKGROUND: Often affecting knee joints, osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common type of arthritis and by 2020 is predicted to become the fourth leading cause of disability globally. Without cure, medication management is symptomatic, mostly with simple analgesics such as acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and glucosamine sulfate. Adherence to arthritis medications is generally low. Intentional non-adherence, that is deliberate decision-making about the use of analgesics, occurs in OA patients. To date, a limited number of studies have explored medication-taking decisions in people with OA nor the extent to which individuals' trade off one treatment factor for another in their decision-making using quantitative techniques. This study aimed to estimate the relative influence of medication-related factors and respondent characteristics on decisions to continue medications among people with symptomatic OA. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among participants attending end-of-study visits in the Long-term Evaluation of Glucosamine Sulfate (LEGS) study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00513422). The paper-based survey was used to estimate the relative importance of seven medication specific factors (pain efficacy, mode of action, dose frequency, treatment schedule, side effects, prescription, and out-of-pocket costs) and respondent characteristics on decisions to continue medications. RESULTS: 188 (response rate 37%) completed surveys were returned. Four of the seven medication factors (side effects, out-of-pocket costs, mode of action, treatment schedule) had a significant effect on the choice to continue medication; patient characteristics did not. Assuming equivalent pain efficacy and disease-modifying properties for glucosamine, the positive relative likelihood of continuing with sustained-release acetaminophen was equivalent to glucosamine. By contrast, the negative relative likelihood of NSAID continuation was mostly driven by the side effect profile. The predicted probability of continuing with glucosamine decreased with increasing out-of-pocket costs. CONCLUSIONS: This study has characterised the complexity of medication-taking decisions that potentially underpin intentional non-adherent behaviour for people with symptomatic OA. In particular, medication risks and cost were important and ought to be borne into considerations in interpreting clinical trial evidence for practice. Ultimately addressing these factors may be the way forward to realising the full potential of health and economic benefits from the efficacious and safe use of OA medications.