Targeting rehabilitation to improve outcomes after total knee arthroplasty in patients at risk of poor outcomes: randomised controlled trial

David F Hamilton, David J Beard, Karen L Barker, Gary J Macfarlane, Christopher E Tuck, Andrew Stoddart, Timothy Wilton, James D Hutchinson, Gordon D Murray, A Hamish R W Simpson, TRIO investigators, Caroline Austrie, Kim Brown, Matthew Carr, Ivan Brenkel, Tom Briggs, Katherine Dillow, Jamila Kassam, Ben Lankester, Emma McLoughlin, Helen Samuel, Jason Seaton, Kate Weatherly, David F Hamilton, David J Beard, Karen L Barker, Gary J Macfarlane, Christopher E Tuck, Andrew Stoddart, Timothy Wilton, James D Hutchinson, Gordon D Murray, A Hamish R W Simpson, TRIO investigators, Caroline Austrie, Kim Brown, Matthew Carr, Ivan Brenkel, Tom Briggs, Katherine Dillow, Jamila Kassam, Ben Lankester, Emma McLoughlin, Helen Samuel, Jason Seaton, Kate Weatherly

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether a progressive course of outpatient physiotherapy offers superior outcomes to a single physiotherapy review and home exercise based intervention when targeted at patients with a predicted poor outcome after total knee arthroplasty.

Design: Parallel group randomised controlled trial.

Setting: 13 secondary and tertiary care centres in the UK providing postoperative physiotherapy.

Participants: 334 participants with knee osteoarthritis who were defined as at risk of a poor outcome after total knee arthroplasty, based on the Oxford knee score, at six weeks postoperatively. 163 were allocated to therapist led outpatient rehabilitation and 171 to a home exercise based protocol.

Interventions: All participants were reviewed by a physiotherapist and commenced 18 sessions of rehabilitation over six weeks, either as therapist led outpatient rehabilitation (progressive goal oriented functional rehabilitation protocol, modified weekly in one-one contact sessions) or as physiotherapy review followed by a home exercise based regimen (without progressive input from a physiotherapist).

Main outcome measures: Primary outcome was Oxford knee score at 52 weeks, with a 4 point difference between groups considered to be clinically meaningful. Secondary outcomes included additional patient reported outcome measures of pain and function at 14, 26, and 52 weeks post-surgery.

Results: 334 patients were randomised. Eight were lost to follow-up. Intervention compliance was more than 85%. The between group difference in Oxford knee score at 52 weeks was 1.91 (95% confidence interval -0.18 to 3.99) points, favouring the outpatient rehabilitation arm (P=0.07). When all time point data were analysed, the between group difference in Oxford knee score was a non-clinically meaningful 2.25 points (0.61 to 3.90, P=0.01). No between group differences were found for secondary outcomes of average pain (0.25 points, -0.78 to 0.28, P=0.36) or worst pain (0.22 points, -0.71 to 0.41, P=0.50) at 52 weeks or earlier time points, or of satisfaction with outcome (odds ratio 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 1.62, P=0.75) or post-intervention function (4.64 seconds, 95% confidence interval -14.25 to 4.96, P=0.34).

Conclusions: Outpatient therapist led rehabilitation was not superior to a single physiotherapist review and home exercise based regimen in patients at risk of poor outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. No clinically relevant differences were observed across primary or secondary outcome measures.

Trials registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN23357609 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01849445.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: funding from Arthritis Research UK; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Flow of participants through the study

References

    1. National Joint Registry. 14th annual report 2017. National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: surgical data to 31 December 2016. 2017. (accessed January 17th, 2019).
    1. Price AJ, Alvand A, Troelsen A, et al. Knee replacement. Lancet 2018;392:1672-82. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32344-4
    1. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:780-5. 10.2106/00004623-200704000-00012
    1. Inacio MCS, Paxton EW, Graves SE, Namba RS, Nemes S. Projected increase in total knee arthroplasty in the United States - an alternative projection model. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2017;25:1797-803. 10.1016/j.joca.2017.07.022
    1. Culliford D, Maskell J, Judge A, Cooper C, Prieto-Alhambra D, Arden NK, COASt Study Group Future projections of total hip and knee arthroplasty in the UK: results from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2015;23:594-600. 10.1016/j.joca.2014.12.022
    1. Hamilton DF, Lane JV, Gaston P, et al. What determines patient satisfaction with surgery? A prospective cohort study of 4709 patients following total joint replacement. BMJ Open 2013;3:e002525. 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002525
    1. Naylor JM, Hart A, Harris IA, Lewin AM. Variation in rehabilitation setting after uncomplicated total knee or hip arthroplasty: a call for evidence-based guidelines. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2019;20:214. 10.1186/s12891-019-2570-8
    1. Buhagiar A, Naylor JM, Harris I, Xuan W, Kohler F, Wright R, Fortunato R. Effect of Inpatient Rehabilitation vs a Monitored Home-Based Program on Mobility in Patients with Total Knee Arthroplasty The HIHO Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2017;317:1037-46.
    1. Hamilton DF, Loth FC, MacDonald DJ, MacFarlane GJ, Beard DJ, Simpson AHR, Patton JT, Howie CR. Exploring variation in patient access of post-discharge physiotherapy following total hip and knee arthroplasty under a choice-based system in the UK: an observational cohort study. BMJ Open 2019;9:e021614.
    1. Smith TO, Dainty JR, Clark EM, Whitehouse MR, Price AJ, MacGregor AJ. Demographic and geographical variability in physiotherapy provision following hip and knee replacement. An analysis from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Physiotherapy 2020;106:1-11. 10.1016/j.physio.2019.11.003
    1. Khan F, Ng L, Gonzalez S, Hale T, Turner-Stokes L. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes following joint replacement at the hip and knee in chronic arthropathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;2:CD004957. 10.1002/14651858.CD004957.pub3.
    1. Artz N, Elvers KT, Lowe CM, Sackley C, Jepson P, Beswick AD. Effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise following total knee replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2015;16:15. 10.1186/s12891-015-0469-6
    1. Minns Lowe CJ, Barker KL, Dewey M, Sackley CM. Effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise after knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2007;335:812. 10.1136/
    1. Buhagiar MA, Naylor JM, Harris IA, Xuan W, Adie S, Lewin A. Assessment of Outcomes of Inpatient or Clinic-Based vs Home-Based Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2:e192810. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.2810
    1. Florez-García M, García-Pérez F, Curbelo R, et al. Efficacy and safety of home-based exercises versus individualized supervised outpatient physical therapy programs after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017;25:3340-53. 10.1007/s00167-016-4231-x
    1. Simpson AHRW, Hamilton DF, Beard DJ, et al. Targeted rehabilitation to improve outcome after total knee replacement (TRIO): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2014;15:44. 10.1186/1745-6215-15-44
    1. Kalairajah Y, Azurza K, Hulme C, Molloy S, Drabu KJ. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties--a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:1037-41. 10.1016/j.arth.2005.04.017
    1. Rothwell AG, Hooper GJ, Hobbs A, Frampton CM. An analysis of the Oxford hip and knee scores and their relationship to early joint revision in the New Zealand Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:413-8. 10.1302/0301-620X.92B3.22913
    1. Piva SR, Gil AB, Almeida GJ, DiGioia AM, 3rd, Levison TJ, Fitzgerald GK. A balance exercise program appears to improve function for patients with total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther 2010;90:880-94. 10.2522/ptj.20090150
    1. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:63-9. 10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063
    1. Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, et al. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89:1010-4. 10.1302/0301-620X.89B8.19424
    1. Beard DJ, Harris K, Dawson J, et al. Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68:73-9. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.08.009
    1. Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011;63(Suppl 11):S240-52. 10.1002/acr.20543
    1. Von Korff M, Jensen MP, Karoly P. Assessing global pain severity by self-report in clinical and health services research. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:3140-51. 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00009
    1. Perrot S, Rozenberg S, Moyse D, Legout V, Marty M, cercle d’étude de douleur en rhumatologie (CEDR) Comparison of daily, weekly or monthly pain assessments in hip and knee osteoarthritis. A 29-day prospective study. Joint Bone Spine 2011;78:510-5. 10.1016/j.jbspin.2010.11.009
    1. Bischoff HA, Stähelin HB, Monsch AU, et al. Identifying a cut-off point for normal mobility: a comparison of the timed ‘up and go’ test in community-dwelling and institutionalised elderly women. Age Ageing 2003;32:315-20. 10.1093/ageing/32.3.315
    1. Ng SS, Hui-Chan CW. The timed up & go test: its reliability and association with lower-limb impairments and locomotor capacities in people with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:1641-7. 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.01.011
    1. Beard D, Hamilton D, Davies L, et al. Evidence-based evaluation of practice and innovation in Physical Therapy using the IDEAL-Physio framework. Phys Ther 2018;98:108-21. 10.1093/ptj/pzx103
    1. NHS Digital. Finalised Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in England for Hip & Knee Replacements, April 2018 – March 2019. 2020. (last accessed 27 Feb 2020)

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner