A randomized pilot study of a comprehensive postoperative exercise program compared with usual care following primary total hip arthroplasty in subjects less than 65 years of age: feasibility, selection of outcome measures and timing of assessment

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Gregory J O’Connor¹  Orfan Arafah¹  Barbara J Luckhurst²  Edward CO Masson¹  Lauren A Beaupre¹ 

[1] Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Alberta, 1F1.52 WMC, 8440-112 St, Edmonton, AB T6G 2B7, Canada;Department of Rehabilitation, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Alberta Health Services, 1F1.52 WMC, 8440-112 St, Edmonton, AB T6G 2B7, Canada

关键词: Complex interventions;    Health related quality of life;    Performance-based;    Rehabilitation;    Total hip arthroplasty;   

Others  :  1125600
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-15-192

 received in 2014-01-22, accepted in 2014-05-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is being used more commonly in younger higher demand patients. The purpose of this randomized pilot study was to explore a) feasibility of comprehensive postoperative rehabilitation compared to usual care following primary THA in subjects <65 years, b) appropriate outcome measures including performance-based measures and c) timing of assessments.

Methods

21 subjects who underwent primary THA were randomized to receive a three-month out-patient rehabilitation program (Intervention) or usual postoperative care (Control). Subjects were assessed preoperatively, six-weeks postoperatively (Pre-intervention) and four and 12 months postoperatively (Post-intervention). Self-report measures were the Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Rand 36-Item Health Survey (RAND-36). Performance-based measures included lower extremity strength, walking speed and endurance, and gait laboratory assessment.

Results

Ten Control and 11 Intervention subjects with an average age of 53.4 (SD9.3) years were randomized. All Intervention subjects completed the program without adverse effects. Although no statistically significantly results were reported, four months postoperatively, Intervention subjects had clinically important differences (CID) in strength compared with Control subjects. Walking endurance, WOMAC and RAND scores improved significantly with no CID noted between groups. Ten (48%) subjects reported a ceiling effect on the WOMAC (9 (43%) subjects on Pain; 1 (5%) subject on Function). No group CID were noted in gait measures.

Conclusions

Our recommendations would be that performance-based strength measures should be considered for the primary outcome in this younger cohort. Because of the ceiling effects with WOMAC Pain, a different pain measure is indicated. Other more challenging functional performance-based tests should be considered such as a more prolonged endurance test. There is merit in one-year follow-up as strength improved after four months in both groups.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Beaupre et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Jones CA, Voaklander DC, Johnston DW, Suarez-Almazor ME: Health related quality of life outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasties in a community based population. J Rheumatol 2000, 27(7):1745-52.
• [2]Stevens M, Wagenmakers R, Groothoff JW, Bulstra SK, van dA-S I, Zijlstra W: Physical activity behavior after total hip arthroplasty (THA): a prediction based on patient characteristics. Patient Edu Counse 2007, 69:196-199.
• [3]Minns Lowe CJ, Barker KL, Dewey ME, Sackley CM: Effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise following hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a systematic review of clinical trials. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2009, 10:98. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]Husby VS, Helgerud J, Bjorgen S, Husby OS, Benum P, Hoff J: Early maximal strength training is an efficient treatment for patients operated with total hip arthroplasty. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009, 90:1658-1667.
• [5]Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2008, 337:a1655.
• [6]Wade DT: Research into the black box of rehabilitation: the risks of a type III error. Clin Rehabil 2001, 15:1-4.
• [7]Quintana JM, Escobar A, Bilbao A, Arostegui I, Lafuente I, Vidaurreta I: Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip joint replacement. Osteoarthr Cartil 2005, 13:1076-1083.
• [8]Stratford PW, Kennedy DM, Riddle DL: New study design evaluated the validity of measures to assess change after hip or knee arthroplasty. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62:347-352.
• [9]Dobson F, Hinman RS, Hall M, Terwee CB, Roos EM, Bennell KL: Measurement properties of performance-based measures to assess physical function in hip and knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Osteoarthr Cartil 2012, 20:1548-1562.
• [10]Kennedy DM, Stratford PW, Wessel J, Gollish JD, Penney D: Assessing stability and change of four performance measures: a longitudinal study evaluating outcome following total hip and knee arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2005, 6:3. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Thorborg K, Petersen J, Magnusson SP, Holmich P: Clinical assessment of hip strength using a hand-held dynamometer is reliable. Scand J Med Sci Sport 2010, 20:493-501.
• [12]Thorborg K, Roos EM, Bartels EM, Petersen J, Holmich P: Validity, reliability and responsiveness of patient-reported outcome questionnaires when assessing hip and groin disability: a systematic review. Br J Sport Med 2010, 44:1186-1196.
• [13]Parent E, Moffet H: Comparative responsiveness of locomotor tests and questionnaires used to follow early recovery after total knee arthroplasty. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002, 83:70-80.
• [14]Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM: The RAND 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Econ 1993, 2(3):217-27.
• [15]Bennell KL, Egerton T, Pua YH, Abbott JH, Sims K, Buchbinder R: Building the rationale and structure for a complex physical therapy intervention within the context of a clinical trial: a multimodal individualized treatment for patients with hip osteoarthritis. Phys Ther 2011, 91:1525-1541.
• [16]Cameron ID: Models of rehabilitation - commonalities of interventions that work and of those that do not. Disabil Rehabil 2010, 32:1051-1058.