The Geras virtual frailty rehabilitation program to build resilience in older adults with frailty during COVID-19: a randomized feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has exacerbated the risk for poor physical and mental health outcomes among vulnerable older adults. Multicomponent interventions could potentially prevent or reduce the risk of becoming frail; however, there is limited evidence about utilizing alternative modes of delivery where access to in-person care may be challenging. This randomized feasibility trial aimed to understand how a multicomponent rehabilitation program can be delivered remotely to vulnerable older adults with frailty during the pandemic. METHODS: Participants were randomized to either a multimodal or socialization arm. Over a 12-week intervention period, the multimodal group received virtual care at home, which included twice-weekly exercise in small group physiotherapy-led live-streamed sessions, nutrition counselling and protein supplementation, medication consultation via a videoconference app, and once-weekly phone calls from student volunteers, while the socialization group received only once-weekly phone calls from the volunteers. The RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance) framework was used to evaluate the feasibility of the program. The main clinical outcomes were change in the 5-times sit-to-stand test (5 × STS) and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) scores. The feasibility outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics and expressed as frequencies and mean percent with corresponding confidence intervals (CI). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for the effectiveness component. RESULTS: The program enrolled 33% (n = 72) of referrals to the study (n = 220), of whom 70 were randomized. Adoption rates from different referral sources were community self-referrals (60%), community organizations (33%), and healthcare providers (25%). At the provider level, implementation rates varied from 75 to 100% for different aspects of program delivery. Participant's adherence levels included virtual exercise sessions 81% (95% CI: 75-88%), home-based exercise 50% (95% CI: 38-62%), protein supplements consumption 68% (95% CI: 55-80%), and medication optimization 38% (95% CI: 21-59%). Most participants (85%) were satisfied with the program. There were no significant changes in clinical outcomes between the two arms. CONCLUSION: The GERAS virtual frailty rehabilitation study for community-dwelling older adults living with frailty was feasible in terms of reach of participants, adoption across referral settings, adherence to implementation, and participant's intention to maintain the program. This program could be feasibly delivered to improve access to socially isolated older adults where barriers to in-person participation exist. However, trials with larger samples and longer follow-up are required to demonstrate effectiveness and sustained behavior change. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04500366. Registered August 5, 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04500366.

Minimum joint space width and tibial cartilage morphology in the knees of healthy individuals: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical use of minimum joint space width (mJSW) and cartilage volume and thickness has been limited to the longitudinal measurement of disease progression (i.e. change over time) rather than the diagnosis of OA in which values are compared to a standard. This is primarily due to lack of establishment of normative values of joint space width and cartilage morphometry as has been done with bone density values in diagnosing osteoporosis. Thus, the purpose of this pilot study is to estimate reference values of medial joint space width and cartilage morphometry in healthy individuals of all ages using standard radiography and peripheral magnetic resonance imaging. DESIGN: For this cross-sectional study, healthy volunteers underwent a fixed-flexion knee X-ray and a peripheral MR (pMR) scan of the same knee using a 1T machine (ONI OrthOne, Wilmington, MA). Radiographs were digitized and analyzed for medial mJSW using an automated algorithm. Only knees scoring 0.05) in either sex. Females had a mean (SD) medial mJSW of 4.8 (0.7) mm compared to males with corresponding larger value of 5.7 (0.8) mm. Cartilage morphometry results showed similar trends with mean (SD) tibial cartilage volume and thickness in females of 1.50 (0.19) microL/mm2 and 1.45 (0.19) mm, respectively, and 1.77 (0.24) microL/mm2 and 1.71 (0.24) mm, respectively, in males. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that medial mJSW values do not decrease with aging in healthy individuals but remain fairly constant throughout the lifespan with "healthy" values of 4.8 mm for females and 5.7 mm for males. Similar trends were seen for cartilage morphology. Results suggest there may be no need to differentiate a t-score and a z-score in OA diagnosis because cartilage thickness and JSW remain constant throughout life in the absence of OA.

Validation of the GALS musculoskeletal screening exam for use in primary care: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: As the proportion of the Canadian population > or =65 grows, so too does the prevalence of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. Approximately 20% of visits to family physicians occur as a result of MSK complaints. The GALS (Gait, Arms, Legs, and Spine) screening examination was developed to assist in the detection of MSK abnormalities. Although MSK exams are primarily performed by rheumatologists or other MSK specialists, expanding their use in primary health care may improve the detection of MSK conditions allowing for earlier treatment. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the use of the GALS locomotor screen in primary care by comparing the results of assessments of family physicians with those of rheumatologists. The secondary goal was to examine the incidence of MSK disorders and assess the frequency with which new diagnoses not previously documented in patients' charts were identified. METHODS: Patients > or =65 years old recruited from an academic family health centre were examined by a rheumatologist and a family physician who recorded the appearance of each participant's gait and the appearance and movement of the arms, legs and spine by deeming them normal or abnormal. GALS scores were compared between physicians with the proportion of observed (Pobs), positive (Ppos) and negative (Pneg) agreement being the primary outcomes. Kappa statistics were also calculated. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the number of "new" diagnoses by comparing rheumatologists' findings with each patient's family practice chart. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients consented to participate (92 with previously diagnosed MSK conditions). Results showed reasonable agreement between family physicians and rheumatologists; Pobs = 0.698, Ppos = 0.614 and Pneg = 0.752. The coefficient of agreement (estimated Kappa) was 0.3675 for the composite GALS score. For individual components of the GALS exam, the highest agreement between family physicians and rheumatologists was in the assessment of gait and arm movement. CONCLUSION: Previously reported increases in undiagnosed signs and symptoms of musculoskeletal conditions have highlighted the need for a simple yet sensitive screening exam for the identification of musculoskeletal abnormalities. Results of this study suggest that family physicians can efficiently use the GALS examination in the assessment of populations with a high proportion of musculoskeletal issues.

Hip protectors decrease hip fracture risk in elderly nursing home residents: a Bayesian meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To design a Bayesian random effects model for pooling binary outcome data from cluster randomized trials (CRTs) with individually randomized trials (IRTs) and then use this model to determine if hip protectors decrease the risk of hip fracture in elderly nursing home residents. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Eight electronic databases were searched; abstracts and papers were reviewed in duplicate. Randomized controlled trials of hip protectors in nursing homes were included. The pooled mean odds ratio (OR) of a hip fracture in an individual allocated to hip protectors with 95% credibility interval (CRI) was calculated. RESULTS: We included four trials of 1,922 individuals (including three CRTs). The pooled OR of an elderly nursing home resident sustaining one or more hip fractures with hip protector allocation was 0.40 (95% CRI 0.25, 0.61). The model was robust in multiple sensitivity analyses assuming alternative intracluster correlation coefficient values. CONCLUSION: The Bayesian approach may be used in meta-analyses of IRTs and CRTs. Using this approach, we have determined that hip protectors decrease the risk of hip fracture in elderly nursing home residents. Methodologic limitations of the included trials and a possible herd effect in CRTs may have influenced these results.

Pharmacological treatment of ankylosing spondylitis: a systematic review.

The purpose of this study was to review the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of pharmacological therapies currently available for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS).A literature search using MEDLINE from 1966 through to April 2005 and a hand search of abstracts from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) meetings for 2001 through to 2004 were performed. References of articles retrieved were also searched. The MEDLINE search yielded 570 citations and 157 abstracts from ACR were identified. Eighty-four studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs); 53 fulfilled the inclusion criteria (pharmacological treatment of AS and RCT) and were included in this review. Statistical pooling of data was not performed because of the disparate outcome measures used. Eight RCTs found nonselective NSAIDs and two RCTs found cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2-selective NSAIDs to be superior to placebo for relief of pain and improvement in physical function. Twenty-nine RCTs showed comparable efficacy and safety between nonselective NSAIDs. One RCT showed no difference between methylprednisolone 1g and 375 mg. Seven RCTs assessing the efficacy of sulfasalazine (sulphasalazine) and two RCTs of methotrexate provided contradictory evidence as to their benefit for treatment of AS. One RCT showed intravenous pamidronate 60 mg to be more effective than 10mg intravenously for the treatment of axial pain. All six RCTs of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha agents demonstrated superiority to placebo for the treatment of axial and peripheral symptoms. Nonselective as well as COX-2-selective NSAIDs can be used for pain control in patients with AS. Other proven treatment options include sulfasalazine for the treatment of peripheral joint symptoms, while limited evidence supports the use of pamidronate or methotrexate, which require further studies. Anti-TNFalpha agents have been found very effective for the treatment of both peripheral and axial symptoms in patients with AS, but their use is limited by cost and uncertainty over long-term efficacy and safety.

Are oral bisphosphonates effective in improving lumbar bone mineral density in breast cancer survivors with osteopenia or osteoporosis?

OBJECTIVE: Breast cancer survivors with osteoporosis or osteopenia are commonly encountered in primary care and gynaecology practices. Our objective was to determine whether treatment with oral bisphosphonates (alendronate or cyclic etidronate) was more effective than calcium with vitamin D in improving lumbar spine bone mineral density (BMD) within one year in breast cancer survivors. METHODS: Breast cancer survivors with at least one year of clinical follow-up were identified from the prospective observational Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO). Analysis of covariance was used to examine the effects of bisphosphonate therapy on change in lumbar spine BMD at one year compared with the effects of calcium with vitamin D (analysis adjusted for baseline L2-L4 BMD, current tamoxifen use, number of prevalent vertebral fractures [VFs], and time since diagnosis of breast cancer, and age). RESULTS: Eighteen patients took calcium and vitamin D, 25 took cyclic etidronate, and 27 took oral alendronate. Adjusted one-year BMD increases for alendronate and cyclic etidronate compared to calcium and vitamin D were as follows: alendronate 4.53% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26%, 7.81%, P = 0.008), and cyclic etidronate 1.85% (-1.55%, 5.25%, P = 0.280). BMD increases were significantly greater in patients with prevalent VF compared to those without VF (P = 0.025). In contrast, time since diagnosis of breast cancer was significantly associated with a decrease in BMD (P = 0.002). We were unable to detect any effect of current tamoxifen use, baseline lumbar spine BMD, or age on changes in BMD at one year. CONCLUSION: Treatment with alendronate was associated with significantly greater improvements in lumbar spine BMD within one year in breast cancer survivors when compared with treatment with cyclic etidronate or calcium and vitamin D.

Do hip protectors decrease the risk of hip fracture in institutional and community-dwelling elderly? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Hip fractures are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Hip protectors are padded undergarments designed to decrease the impact of a fall on the hip. We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials of hip protectors to determine if they reduce hip fractures in the elderly. Analyses were pooled according to participant residence--community or institutional (the latter, included nursing homes, residential group homes or seniors' hostels). We included individually randomized and statistically adjusted cluster randomized trials. Seven trials of 12- to 28-month duration were included. The Safehip brand of hip protector was used in most studies. Compliance rates in the treatment groups varied from 31 to 68%. In four trials including a total of 5,696 community-dwelling seniors, the hip fracture rates in control groups ranged from 1.1 to 7.4%, and the pooled risk difference with hip protector allocation was 0% [95% confidence intervals (CI), -1%, +1%), with a relative risk of 1.07 (0.81, 1.42). In three trials including 1,188 institutionalized elderly participants, hip fracture rates in the control groups varied from 8 to 19.4%, and the pooled risk difference for sustaining one or more hip fractures with hip protector allocation was -3.7% (95% CI, -7.4%, 0.1%), with a relative risk of 0.56 (0.31, 1.01) (with statistically significant heterogeneity of treatment effect). In a post-hoc subgroup analysis of two trials comprised of exclusively nursing home residents, the risk difference with hip protector allocation was -4.4% (-8.09, -0.76) with a relative risk of 0.50 (0.28, 0.91) (n=1,014). Thus, there is little evidence to support the use of hip protectors outside the nursing home setting. The potential benefit of hip protectors in reducing hip fractures in nursing home residents requires further confirmation.

Adherence to bisphosphonates and hormone replacement therapy in a tertiary care setting of patients in the CANDOO database.

Therapies for osteoporosis must be taken for at least 1 year to be effective. The purpose of this study was to determine the difference in adherence to etidronate, alendronate and hormone replacement therapy in a group of patients seen at our tertiary care centres. The Canadian Database of Osteoporosis and Osteopenia (CANDOO), a prospective observational database designed to capture clinical data, was searched for patients who started therapy following entry into CANDOO. There were 1196 initiating etidronate, 477 alendronate and 294 hormone replacement therapy women and men aged (mean, SD) 65.8 (8.7) years in the study. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess differences between treatment groups in the time to discontinuation of therapy. Several potential covariates such as anthropometry, medications, illnesses, fractures and lifestyle factors were entered into the model. A forward selection technique was used to generate the final model. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Adjusted results indicated that alendronate-treated patients were more likely to discontinue therapy as compared with etidronate-treated patients (1.404; 95% CI: 1.150, 1.714). After 1 year, 90.3% of patients were still taking etidronate compared with 77.6% for alendronate. No statistically significant differences were found between hormone replacement therapy and etidronate users (0.971; 95% CI: 0.862, 1.093) and hormone replacement therapy and alendronate users (0.824; 95% CI: 0.624, 1.088) after controlling for potential covariates. After 1 year, 80.1% of patients were still taking hormone replacement therapy, which decreased to 44.5% after 6 years. Increasing age and presence of incident non-vertebral fractures were found to be independent predictors of adherence. In conclusion, alendronate users were more likely to discontinue therapy than etidronate users over the follow-up period. Potential barriers to long-term patient adherence to osteoporosis therapies need to be evaluated.