Follow-up of individualised physical activity on prescription and individualised advice in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: A randomised controlled trial.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Clinical Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-26 DOI:10.1177/02692155241234666
Regina Bendrik, Lena V Kallings, Kristina Bröms, Margareta Emtner
{"title":"Follow-up of individualised physical activity on prescription and individualised advice in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: A randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Regina Bendrik, Lena V Kallings, Kristina Bröms, Margareta Emtner","doi":"10.1177/02692155241234666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare the long-term effects of two different individualised physical activity interventions in hip or knee osteoarthritis patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomised, assessor-blinded, controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Primary care.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Patients with clinically verified hip or knee osteoarthritis, <150 min/week with moderate or vigorous physical activity, aged 40-74.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>The advice group (n = 69) received a 1-h information and goalsetting session for individualised physical activity. The prescription group (n = 72) received information, goalsetting, individualised written prescription, self-monitoring, and four follow-ups.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Physical activity, physical function, pain and quality of life at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were only minor differences in outcomes between the two groups. For self-reported physical activity, the advice group had improved from a mean of 102 (95% CI 74-130) minutes/week at baseline to 214 (95% CI 183-245) minutes/week at 24 months, while the prescription group had improved from 130 (95% CI 103-157) to 176 (95% CI 145-207) minutes/week (p = 0.01 between groups). Number of steps/day decreased by -514 (95% CI -567-462) steps from baseline to 24 months in the advice group, and the decrease in the prescription group was -852 (95% CI -900-804) steps (p = 0.415 between groups). Pain (HOOS/KOOS) in the advice group had improved by 7.9 points (95% CI 7.5-8.2) and in the prescription group by 14.7 points (95% CI 14.3-15.1) from baseline to 24 months (p = 0.024 between groups).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no evidence that individualised physical activity on prescription differs from individualised advice in improving long-term effects in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"770-782"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11059830/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241234666","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Compare the long-term effects of two different individualised physical activity interventions in hip or knee osteoarthritis patients.

Design: Randomised, assessor-blinded, controlled trial.

Setting: Primary care.

Subjects: Patients with clinically verified hip or knee osteoarthritis, <150 min/week with moderate or vigorous physical activity, aged 40-74.

Intervention: The advice group (n = 69) received a 1-h information and goalsetting session for individualised physical activity. The prescription group (n = 72) received information, goalsetting, individualised written prescription, self-monitoring, and four follow-ups.

Main measures: Physical activity, physical function, pain and quality of life at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months.

Results: There were only minor differences in outcomes between the two groups. For self-reported physical activity, the advice group had improved from a mean of 102 (95% CI 74-130) minutes/week at baseline to 214 (95% CI 183-245) minutes/week at 24 months, while the prescription group had improved from 130 (95% CI 103-157) to 176 (95% CI 145-207) minutes/week (p = 0.01 between groups). Number of steps/day decreased by -514 (95% CI -567-462) steps from baseline to 24 months in the advice group, and the decrease in the prescription group was -852 (95% CI -900-804) steps (p = 0.415 between groups). Pain (HOOS/KOOS) in the advice group had improved by 7.9 points (95% CI 7.5-8.2) and in the prescription group by 14.7 points (95% CI 14.3-15.1) from baseline to 24 months (p = 0.024 between groups).

Conclusions: There is no evidence that individualised physical activity on prescription differs from individualised advice in improving long-term effects in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
髋关节或膝关节骨关节炎患者根据处方和个性化建议进行个性化体育锻炼的随访:随机对照试验。
目标:比较两种不同的个性化体育锻炼干预措施对髋关节或膝关节骨关节炎患者的长期影响比较两种不同的个性化体育锻炼干预措施对髋关节或膝关节骨关节炎患者的长期影响:随机、评估者盲法对照试验:受试者临床确诊的髋关节或膝关节骨关节炎患者:建议组(69 人)接受为期 1 小时的个体化体育锻炼信息和目标设定课程。处方组(n = 72)接受信息、目标设定、个性化书面处方、自我监测和四次随访:主要测量指标:基线、6 个月、12 个月和 24 个月的体力活动、身体功能、疼痛和生活质量:结果:两组之间的结果仅有微小差异。在自我报告的体力活动方面,建议组从基线时的平均每周102(95% CI 74-130)分钟增加到24个月时的每周214(95% CI 183-245)分钟,而处方组则从每周130(95% CI 103-157)分钟增加到176(95% CI 145-207)分钟(组间P = 0.01)。从基线到 24 个月期间,建议组的每天步数减少了-514 步(95% CI -567-462),处方组减少了-852 步(95% CI -900-804)(组间 p = 0.415)。从基线到 24 个月期间,建议组的疼痛(HOOS/KOOS)改善了 7.9 分(95% CI 7.5-8.2),处方组改善了 14.7 分(95% CI 14.3-15.1)(组间 p = 0.024):没有证据表明,在改善髋关节或膝关节骨关节炎患者的长期效果方面,处方中的个性化体育锻炼与个性化建议有所不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
117
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Priorities for post-stroke aphasia service development: Prioritisation phase of an experience-based co-design study. Effect of sensorimotor training on stability, mobility, and quality of life after lower extremity thermal burns: A prospective randomised controlled trial. Cardiopulmonary exercise tests in people with chronic stroke: Interpretation and clinical application. Effects of Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire thresholds and gender on spatiotemporal parameters during walking in patients with chronic low back pain. Aquatic exercise interventions in the treatment of musculoskeletal upper extremity disorders: A scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1