Effects of a Rehabilitation Program on Physical Performance and Disease Self-management in Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Effects of a Group-based Exercise and Educational Program on Physical Performance and Disease Self-management in Rheumatoid Arthritis: a Randomized Controlled Study
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Groningen
-
Haren, Groningen, Netherlands, PO box 30 002
- University Medical Center Groningen, Center for Rehabilitation
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- medical diagnosis of RA according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria
- between 18 and 66 years of age
Exclusion Criteria:
- severe disease activity (Disease Activity Score:DAS-28 > 5.1)
- cardiac or pulmonary diseases resulting in restrictions in their ability to follow a physical exercise program
- a Steinbrocker classification of functional capacity in RA ≥ 3
- no stable medication for the RA
- intra-articular injections during the time of the study
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: fit-program
Participants in the intervention group followed an eight week multi-disciplinary group rehabilitation program, consisting of a physical exercise part and an educational component.
|
Participants in the intervention group followed an eight week multi-disciplinary group rehabilitation program, consisting of a physical exercise part and an educational component.
The physical exercise part consisted of a muscle exercise circuit and bicycle training,sport and aqua jogging.
The educational part consisted of a weekly sixty minutes session.
A multi-disciplinary group of healthcare professionals gave specialist orientated informational advice about how to handle the consequences of RA.
Special attention was paid to ensure adjusting the level of each patients activity level to the participants' actual energy level.
Further information was given about body sensations, sports, food and energy, pain, fatigue, emotional changes, sleeping disturbance and daily routine.
Other Names:
|
|
Other: waiting list control group
The waiting-list control group was allowed to enter the FIT program for rehabilitation after the study period.
|
waiting list control group with no intervention
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in VO2 Max, Maximum Oxygen Uptake in ml/Min/kg is the Standard Index of Cardio-respiratory Fitness
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks
|
maximum oxygen uptake(VO2max, in ml/min/kg)was determined using the Åstrand-Rhyming test.The workload on the cycle ergometer was increased every minute by 25 watts until a steady-state heart rate was achieved.
Participants had to sustain cycling for about 6 minutes, the heart rate(HR) was taken every minute.
Mean HR of the 5th and 6th minute was registered.
With the given workload, observed HR and participants'weight, maximal oxygen uptake can be established using the Åstrand-Rhyming nomogram.
Values vary from < 21( sedentary with disease) to > 57 ( very good physical condition).
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Self-efficacy Pain and Other Symptoms
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Self-efficacy was assessed by the Arthritis-Self-efficacy Scale Dutch version.
This arthritis self-efficacy scale contains two sub scales: self-efficacy pain (5 items related to coping with pain, and self-efficacy other symptoms (6 items related to coping with other symptoms, such as depression, fatigue and frustrations.A five-point ordinal scale is used ranging from 'totally disagree' (1) to 'totally agree' (5).
We computed a mean score of 11 items ranging from 1-5.
A higher score refers to higher self-efficacy.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
|
Change in Self-efficacy Function
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Self-efficacy function was assessed by the Arthritis-Self-efficacy Scale Dutch version The subscale self-efficacy function contains 8 items related to physical function.
A five-point ordinal scale is used ranging from 'totally disagree' (1) to 'totally agree' (5).
A mean score of 8 items was computed ranging from 1-5.
A higher score refers to higher self-efficacy.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
|
Change in Muscle Strength of the Upper Extremity
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Muscle strength was assessed using a hand-held dynamometer (Microfet, Hoggan health Industries Inc.USA).Maximal voluntary isometric muscle strength of the elbow-flexors, elbow-extensors, was tested and recorded three times for each muscle group.
All tests were performed bilaterally.
The mean value of three measurements was computed.
In addition a sum score of the mean values of the flexors and extensors on both sides for the upper extremity (UE)was computed and taken for analyses.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
|
Change in Muscle Strength of the Lower Extremity
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Muscle strength was assessed using a hand-held dynamometer (Microfet, Hoggan health Industries Inc.USA).Maximal voluntary isometric muscle strength of the knee-flexor and knee-extensors, was tested and recorded three times for each muscle group.
All tests were performed bilaterally.
The mean value of three measurements was computed.
In addition a sum score of the mean values of the flexors and extensors on both sides for the lower extremity (LE)was computed and taken for analyses.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
|
Change in Health Status: Physical Health
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Self-reported health status was assessed using the Arthritis Impact-Measurement Scale-2, the Dutch version (Dutch-AIMS2).The questionnaire contains 77 items which represent 5 dimensions: physical functioning, psychological functioning, symptoms, social interaction and role functioning.
Responses are recorded on a 5-point scale.
All responses were recoded and calculated to a 0-10 scale.
Scores were modified according to the number of co-morbidity complaints, as was recommended in the Dutch-AIMS2 manual.
A low score indicates better health.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
|
Change in Health Status: Psychological Health
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Self-reported health status was assessed using the Arthritis Impact-Measurement Scale-2, the Dutch version (Dutch-AIMS2).The questionnaire contains 77 items which represent 5 dimensions: physical functioning, psychological functioning, symptoms, social interaction and role functioning.
Responses are recorded on a 5-point scale.
All responses were recoded and calculated to a 0-10 scale.
Scores were modified according to the number of co-morbidity complaints, as was recommended in the Dutch-AIMS2 manual.
A low score indicates better health.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
|
Change in Health Status: Social Interaction
Time Frame: baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Self-reported health status was assessed using the Arthritis Impact-Measurement Scale-2, the Dutch version (Dutch-AIMS2).The questionnaire contains 77 items which represent 5 dimensions: physical functioning, psychological functioning, symptoms, social interaction and role functioning.
Responses are recorded on a 5-point scale.
All responses were recoded and calculated to a 0-10 scale.
Scores were modified according to the number of co-morbidity complaints, as was recommended in the Dutch-AIMS2 manual.
A low score indicates better health.
|
baseline, postintervention at 9 weeks,
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Ellen van Weert, phd, UMCG
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 210.076
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.