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.

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.

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.

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.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the hip.

BACKGROUND: Current international treatment guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with symptomatic hip OA report are based on expert opinion only. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether land-based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with hip OA in terms of reduced joint pain and/or improved physical function. SEARCH STRATEGY: Five databases were searched from 1966 up until August 2008. 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 the water) with a non-exercise group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. All analyses were conducted on continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Combining the results of the five included RCTs demonstrated a small treatment effect for pain, but no benefit in terms of improved self-reported physical function. Only one of these five RCTs exclusively recruited people with symptomatic hip OA. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The limited number and small sample size of the included RCTs restricts the confidence that can be attributed to these results. Adequately powered RCTs evaluating exercise programs specifically designed for people with symptomatic hip OA need to be conducted.

Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee.

BACKGROUND: Biomechanical factors, such as reduced muscle strength and joint malalignment, have an important role in the initiation and progression of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Currently, there is no known cure for OA; however, disease-related factors, such as impaired muscle function and reduced fitness, are potentially amenable to therapeutic exercise. 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. SEARCH STRATEGY: Five electronic databases were searched, up until December 2007. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials randomising individuals and comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise (as opposed to exercises conducted in the water) with a non-exercise group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. All analyses were conducted on continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: The 32 included studies provided data on 3616 participants for knee pain and 3719 participants for self-reported physical function. Meta-analysis revealed a beneficial treatment effect with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 0.50) for pain; and SMD 0.37 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.49) for physical function. There was marked variability across the included studies in participants recruited, symptom duration, exercise interventions assessed and important aspects of study methodology. The results were sensitive to the number of direct supervision occasions provided and various aspects of study methodology. While the pooled beneficial effects of exercise programs providing less than 12 direct supervision occasions or studies utilising more rigorous methodologies remained significant and clinically relevant, between study heterogeneity remained marked and the magnitude of the treatment effect of these studies would be considered small. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is platinum level evidence that land-based therapeutic exercise has at least short term benefit in terms of reduced knee pain and improved physical function for people with knee OA. The magnitude of the treatment effect would be considered small, but comparable to estimates reported for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Running Reduces Uncontrollable Stress-Evoked Serotonin and Potentiates Stress-Evoked Dopamine Concentrations in the Rat Dorsal Striatum.

Accumulating evidence from both the human and animal literature indicates that exercise reduces the negative consequences of stress. The neurobiological etiology for this stress protection, however, is not completely understood. Our lab reported that voluntary wheel running protects rats from expressing depression-like instrumental learning deficits on the shuttle box escape task after exposure to unpredictable and inescapable tail shocks (uncontrollable stress). Impaired escape behavior is a result of stress-sensitized serotonin (5-HT) neuron activity in the dorsal raphe (DRN) and subsequent excessive release of 5-HT into the dorsal striatum following exposure to a comparatively mild stressor. However, the possible mechanisms by which exercise prevents stress-induced escape deficits are not well characterized. The purpose of this experiment was to test the hypothesis that exercise blunts the stress-evoked release of 5-HT in the dorsal striatum. Changes to dopamine (DA) levels were also examined, since striatal DA signaling is critical for instrumental learning and can be influenced by changes to 5-HT activity. Adult male F344 rats, housed with or without running wheels for 6 weeks, were either exposed to tail shock or remained undisturbed in laboratory cages. Twenty-four hours later, microdialysis was performed in the medial (DMS) and lateral (DLS) dorsal striatum to collect extracellular 5-HT and DA before, during, and following 2 mild foot shocks. We report wheel running prevents foot shock-induced elevation of extracellular 5-HT and potentiates DA concentrations in both the DMS and DLS approximately 24 h following exposure to uncontrollable stress. These data may provide a possible mechanism by which exercise prevents depression-like instrumental learning deficits following exposure to acute stress.

Land-based exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if clinical guidelines recommending therapeutic exercise for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) are supported by rigorous scientific evidence. To explore whether the magnitude of treatment benefit reported in randomized controlled trials (RCT) is associated with exercise dosage or study methodology. METHODS: We conducted a metaanalysis of RCT comparing some form of land-based therapeutic exercise with a nonexercise group using pain and self-reported physical function outcomes. RESULTS: The 32 included studies provided data on almost 3800 participants. Metaanalysis revealed a beneficial treatment effect: standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.40 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 0.50] for knee pain; SMD 0.37 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.49) for physical function. While the pooled beneficial effects of the 9 RCT evaluating exercise programs providing fewer than 12 direct supervision occasions or the 9 RCT judged to have a low risk of bias remained significant and clinically relevant, the magnitude of treatment benefit pooled from these RCT was significantly smaller than the comparator group (12 or more supervision occasions, moderate to high risk of bias, respectively). The mode of treatment delivery (individual treatments, exercise classes, home program) was not significantly associated with the magnitude of treatment benefit. CONCLUSION: There is evidence that land-based therapeutic exercise has at least short-term benefit in terms of reduced knee pain and physical disability for people with knee OA. The magnitude of the treatment effect was significantly associated with the number of direct supervision occasions provided and study methodology (assessor blinding, adequate allocation concealment).

Management of fall-related injuries in the elderly: a retrospective chart review of patients presenting to the emergency department of a community-based teaching hospital.

PURPOSE: To identify current practice for elderly individuals who have sustained a fall-related injury and subsequently presented to the emergency department (ED) of a community-based hospital in Toronto, Ontario. METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal chart review was conducted for 300 persons, 65 years of age and older, who presented to the ED of a community-based teaching hospital with a fall from June 2004 through May 2005. Data were collected using a tool created by the investigators (based on information gathered through a literature review) to capture information related to risk factors for falling. RESULTS: Our study sample was demographically similar to elderly individuals in other fall-related studies. Most patients discharged directly from the ED did not receive multidisciplinary care. In the ED, all patients saw a nurse or physician, while only 1.3% (n = 4) saw a physical therapist, 3.0% (n = 9) saw an occupational therapist, and 5.3% (n = 16) saw a social worker. At discharge, 62% (n = 152) had no documented referral for follow-up care. Abilities related to falls in elderly individuals were not consistently assessed in the ED. Frequency of assessment for these abilities was as follows: (1) gait, 10.2%; (2) balance, 4.1%; (3) lower-extremity range of motion, 4.9%; (4) lower-extremity strength, 2.0%; (5) cognition, 26.1%; (6) vision, 2.0%; (7) ability to perform activities of daily living, 7.3%. In the 6 months following the index fall, 8.3% of patients returned to the ED of the same hospital because of a subsequent fall. CONCLUSIONS: In the ED, fall-related risk factors were not consistently assessed or documented, and few patients received multidisciplinary management. Since elderly individuals who fall commonly present to the ED, the implementation of evidence-based strategies aimed at preventing repeat falls should be considered.

Therapeutic exercise for people with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether land based therapeutic exercise is beneficial for people with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee in terms of reduced joint pain, improved physical function, and/or the patient's global assessment of therapeutic effectiveness. METHODS: Five databases were searched for randomized clinical trials. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each study and then combined using a fixed effects model. RESULTS: Only 2 studies, totaling about 100 participants, could potentially provide data on people with hip OA. Fourteen studies provided data on 1633 participants with knee OA. Nine of these studies were considered of high methodological quality. For pain, combining the results revealed a mean moderate beneficial effect (SMD 0.46, 95% Cl 0.35, 0.57), while for self-reported physical function a mean small beneficial effect (SMD 0.33, 95% CI 0.23, 0.43) was found. These results appeared to be sensitive to blinding of outcome assessor and choice of control group. CONCLUSION: Land based therapeutic exercise was shown to reduce pain and improve physical function for people with OA of the knee.