对照组很重要膝关节和髋关节骨关节炎患者的疼痛、身体功能和力量相对于对比干预的改善情况

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism Pub Date : 2024-08-16 DOI:10.1016/j.semarthrit.2024.152538
Kendal A. Marriott , Michelle Hall , Jacquelyn M. Maciukiewicz , Rachel D. Almaw , Emily G. Wiebenga , Natasha K. Ivanochko , Daniel Rinaldi , Emma V. Tung , Kim L. Bennell , Monica R. Maly
{"title":"对照组很重要膝关节和髋关节骨关节炎患者的疼痛、身体功能和力量相对于对比干预的改善情况","authors":"Kendal A. Marriott ,&nbsp;Michelle Hall ,&nbsp;Jacquelyn M. Maciukiewicz ,&nbsp;Rachel D. Almaw ,&nbsp;Emily G. Wiebenga ,&nbsp;Natasha K. Ivanochko ,&nbsp;Daniel Rinaldi ,&nbsp;Emma V. Tung ,&nbsp;Kim L. Bennell ,&nbsp;Monica R. Maly","doi":"10.1016/j.semarthrit.2024.152538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA), the mechanism for resistance exercise improving clinical outcomes and the dose-response between strength and clinical outcomes are unknown; in part due to inconsistent trial designs across studies.</p></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To determine whether the effects of resistance exercise interventions on pain and function differ based on comparator group; and whether there is an association between improvements in lower extremity strength with improvements in pain and function in knee and hip OA.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We searched 6 databases (inception to January 28 2023,) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing land-based, resistance exercise-only interventions with no intervention or any other intervention. There were four subgroups for comparator intervention: NONE (none/placebo/sham/usual care), EXE (other exercise interventions alone), NONEXE (non-exercise interventions alone), COMBO (combined exercise + non-exercise interventions). The between-group effect (ES) was calculated for immediate post-intervention pain and function (activities of daily living (ADL) and sports/recreation (SPORT)). Meta-regression analyses were completed to evaluate the association between improvements in lower extremity strength (independent variable) and improvements in pain, ADL and SPORT (dependent variables), irrespective of comparator intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For knee OA (257 studies), there were large benefits for pain [ES (95 % CI) = -0.92 (-1.15, -0.69)], ADL [-0.79 (-1.01, -0.56)] and SPORT [-0.79 (-1.02, -0.56)] favouring resistance exercise interventions compared to NONE. For knee pain, there was also a moderate benefit favouring COMBO interventions compared to resistance exercise interventions [0.44 (0.23, 0.65)]. For hip OA (15 studies), there were moderate benefits for pain [-0.51 (-0.68, -0.33)], ADL [-0.57 (-0.78, -0.36)] and SPORT [-0.52 (-0.70, -0.35)] favouring exercise interventions compared to NONE. For hip pain, there was also a moderate benefit favouring NONEXE interventions compared to resistance exercise interventions [0.57 (0.17, 0.97)]. For knee OA, greater strength gains were associated with larger improvements in pain [β (95 % CI) = -0.24 (-0.38, -0.09)], ADL [-0.43 (-0.73, -0.12)] and SPORT [-0.37 (-0.73, -0.00)].</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In knee and hip OA, the effects of resistance exercise on pain and function improvements depend on the comparator intervention. For knee OA, a dose-response relationship was observed between lower extremity strength gains with pain and function improvements.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21715,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049017224001781/pdfft?md5=b213f890a73d859c14d35883761f06a9&pid=1-s2.0-S0049017224001781-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The control group matters: Pain, physical function and strength improvements relative to the comparator intervention in knee and hip osteoarthritis\",\"authors\":\"Kendal A. Marriott ,&nbsp;Michelle Hall ,&nbsp;Jacquelyn M. Maciukiewicz ,&nbsp;Rachel D. Almaw ,&nbsp;Emily G. Wiebenga ,&nbsp;Natasha K. Ivanochko ,&nbsp;Daniel Rinaldi ,&nbsp;Emma V. Tung ,&nbsp;Kim L. Bennell ,&nbsp;Monica R. Maly\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.semarthrit.2024.152538\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA), the mechanism for resistance exercise improving clinical outcomes and the dose-response between strength and clinical outcomes are unknown; in part due to inconsistent trial designs across studies.</p></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To determine whether the effects of resistance exercise interventions on pain and function differ based on comparator group; and whether there is an association between improvements in lower extremity strength with improvements in pain and function in knee and hip OA.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We searched 6 databases (inception to January 28 2023,) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing land-based, resistance exercise-only interventions with no intervention or any other intervention. There were four subgroups for comparator intervention: NONE (none/placebo/sham/usual care), EXE (other exercise interventions alone), NONEXE (non-exercise interventions alone), COMBO (combined exercise + non-exercise interventions). The between-group effect (ES) was calculated for immediate post-intervention pain and function (activities of daily living (ADL) and sports/recreation (SPORT)). Meta-regression analyses were completed to evaluate the association between improvements in lower extremity strength (independent variable) and improvements in pain, ADL and SPORT (dependent variables), irrespective of comparator intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>For knee OA (257 studies), there were large benefits for pain [ES (95 % CI) = -0.92 (-1.15, -0.69)], ADL [-0.79 (-1.01, -0.56)] and SPORT [-0.79 (-1.02, -0.56)] favouring resistance exercise interventions compared to NONE. For knee pain, there was also a moderate benefit favouring COMBO interventions compared to resistance exercise interventions [0.44 (0.23, 0.65)]. For hip OA (15 studies), there were moderate benefits for pain [-0.51 (-0.68, -0.33)], ADL [-0.57 (-0.78, -0.36)] and SPORT [-0.52 (-0.70, -0.35)] favouring exercise interventions compared to NONE. For hip pain, there was also a moderate benefit favouring NONEXE interventions compared to resistance exercise interventions [0.57 (0.17, 0.97)]. For knee OA, greater strength gains were associated with larger improvements in pain [β (95 % CI) = -0.24 (-0.38, -0.09)], ADL [-0.43 (-0.73, -0.12)] and SPORT [-0.37 (-0.73, -0.00)].</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In knee and hip OA, the effects of resistance exercise on pain and function improvements depend on the comparator intervention. For knee OA, a dose-response relationship was observed between lower extremity strength gains with pain and function improvements.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049017224001781/pdfft?md5=b213f890a73d859c14d35883761f06a9&pid=1-s2.0-S0049017224001781-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049017224001781\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049017224001781","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景在膝关节和髋关节骨性关节炎(OA)中,阻力运动改善临床结果的机制以及力量与临床结果之间的剂量反应尚不清楚;部分原因是各研究的试验设计不一致。目的确定阻力运动干预对疼痛和功能的影响是否因比较组而异;下肢力量的改善与膝关节和髋关节OA疼痛和功能的改善之间是否存在关联。方法我们检索了6个数据库(起始时间至2023年1月28日),以获得比较陆上纯阻力运动干预与无干预或任何其他干预的随机对照试验(RCT)。比较干预分为四个亚组:NONE(无/安慰剂/沙姆/常规护理)、EXE(仅其他运动干预)、NONEXE(仅非运动干预)、COMBO(综合运动+非运动干预)。针对干预后即刻出现的疼痛和功能(日常生活活动 (ADL) 和运动/娱乐 (SPORT))计算组间效应 (ES)。结果对于膝关节 OA(257 项研究),与 "无 "相比,阻力运动干预对疼痛[ES (95 % CI) = -0.92 (-1.15, -0.69)]、日常生活[-0.79 (-1.01,-0.56)]和运动[-0.79 (-1.02, -0.56)]的改善有很大的益处。对于膝关节疼痛,与阻力运动干预相比,COMBO干预也有中等程度的获益[0.44 (0.23, 0.65)]。对于髋关节 OA(15 项研究),运动干预对疼痛[-0.51 (-0.68, -0.33)]、ADL[-0.57 (-0.78, -0.36)]和运动[-0.52 (-0.70, -0.35)]的中度获益优于无获益。对于髋关节疼痛,与阻力运动干预相比,非阻力运动干预也有中等程度的获益[0.57 (0.17, 0.97)]。结论在膝关节和髋关节OA中,阻力运动对疼痛和功能改善的效果取决于比较干预。就膝关节 OA 而言,下肢力量增加与疼痛和功能改善之间存在剂量反应关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The control group matters: Pain, physical function and strength improvements relative to the comparator intervention in knee and hip osteoarthritis

Background

In knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA), the mechanism for resistance exercise improving clinical outcomes and the dose-response between strength and clinical outcomes are unknown; in part due to inconsistent trial designs across studies.

Purpose

To determine whether the effects of resistance exercise interventions on pain and function differ based on comparator group; and whether there is an association between improvements in lower extremity strength with improvements in pain and function in knee and hip OA.

Methods

We searched 6 databases (inception to January 28 2023,) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing land-based, resistance exercise-only interventions with no intervention or any other intervention. There were four subgroups for comparator intervention: NONE (none/placebo/sham/usual care), EXE (other exercise interventions alone), NONEXE (non-exercise interventions alone), COMBO (combined exercise + non-exercise interventions). The between-group effect (ES) was calculated for immediate post-intervention pain and function (activities of daily living (ADL) and sports/recreation (SPORT)). Meta-regression analyses were completed to evaluate the association between improvements in lower extremity strength (independent variable) and improvements in pain, ADL and SPORT (dependent variables), irrespective of comparator intervention.

Results

For knee OA (257 studies), there were large benefits for pain [ES (95 % CI) = -0.92 (-1.15, -0.69)], ADL [-0.79 (-1.01, -0.56)] and SPORT [-0.79 (-1.02, -0.56)] favouring resistance exercise interventions compared to NONE. For knee pain, there was also a moderate benefit favouring COMBO interventions compared to resistance exercise interventions [0.44 (0.23, 0.65)]. For hip OA (15 studies), there were moderate benefits for pain [-0.51 (-0.68, -0.33)], ADL [-0.57 (-0.78, -0.36)] and SPORT [-0.52 (-0.70, -0.35)] favouring exercise interventions compared to NONE. For hip pain, there was also a moderate benefit favouring NONEXE interventions compared to resistance exercise interventions [0.57 (0.17, 0.97)]. For knee OA, greater strength gains were associated with larger improvements in pain [β (95 % CI) = -0.24 (-0.38, -0.09)], ADL [-0.43 (-0.73, -0.12)] and SPORT [-0.37 (-0.73, -0.00)].

Conclusion

In knee and hip OA, the effects of resistance exercise on pain and function improvements depend on the comparator intervention. For knee OA, a dose-response relationship was observed between lower extremity strength gains with pain and function improvements.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
176
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism provides access to the highest-quality clinical, therapeutic and translational research about arthritis, rheumatology and musculoskeletal disorders that affect the joints and connective tissue. Each bimonthly issue includes articles giving you the latest diagnostic criteria, consensus statements, systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as clinical and translational research studies. Read this journal for the latest groundbreaking research and to gain insights from scientists and clinicians on the management and treatment of musculoskeletal and autoimmune rheumatologic diseases. The journal is of interest to rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, internal medicine physicians, immunologists and specialists in bone and mineral metabolism.
期刊最新文献
Real-world assessment of the efficacy and tolerability profile of JAK inhibitors in difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis Systematic review of treatments for the gastrointestinal manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus Primary headache in SLE –systematic review and meta-analysis Information and communication technology-based patient education for autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: A scoping review Improvement in spinal pain at night and its impact on long-term outcomes in radiographic axial spondyloarthritis: Results from Ixekizumab COAST-V randomised trial
×
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