Study protocol: Prosthesis versus Active (ProAct) exercise program in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis - a multicenter, randomized controlled trial

Josefine Beck Larsen, Theis Muncholm Thillemann, Antti P Launonen, Helle Kvistgaard Østergaard, Thomas Falstie-Jensen, Aleksi Reito, Steen Lund Jensen, Inger Mechlenburg, Josefine Beck Larsen, Theis Muncholm Thillemann, Antti P Launonen, Helle Kvistgaard Østergaard, Thomas Falstie-Jensen, Aleksi Reito, Steen Lund Jensen, Inger Mechlenburg

Abstract

Background and purpose: Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and shoulder exercises are both effective treatments for reducing pain and improving function in glenohumeral osteoarthritis. However, the effectiveness of TSA has not been compared with non-surgical treatment in a randomized controlled trial. We will examine whether TSA followed bystandard postsurgical rehabilitation is superior to a 12-week exercise program in patients with primary glenohumeral OA who are eligible for unilateral TSA.

Patients and methods: In this Nordic multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial, patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis eligible for TSA will be allocated to either TSA followed by usual care or exercise only. The exercise intervention comprises 12 weeks of exercise with one weekly physiotherapist-supervised session. Based on the sample size calculation, the trial needs to include 102 patients. Duration and outcome: Recruitment was initiated in April 2021 and is expected to be completed by the end of March 2024. Primary outcome is patient-reported quality of life, measured as total WOOS score 12 months after initiation of treatment. The key secondary outcomes include patient-reported pain intensity at rest and during activity; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (DASH); the use of analgesics during the previous week; and adverse events.

Trial registration: The trial is approved by the Central Denmark Region Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics (Journal No 1-10-72-29-21) and by the Danish Data Protection Agency (Journal No 1-16-02-199-21). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04845074.

References

    1. Roos E M, Juhl C B. Osteoarthritis 2012 year in review: rehabilitation and outcomes. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2012; 20(12): 1477-83. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2012.08.028.
    1. Craig R S, Goodier H, Singh J A, Hopewell S, Rees J L. Shoulder replacement surgery for osteoarthritis and rotator cuff tear arthropathy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 4: CD012879. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012879.pub2.
    1. Rasmussen J V, Amundsen A, Sorensen A K B, Klausen T W, Jakobsen J, Jensen S L, et al. . Increased use of total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and improved patient-reported outcome in Denmark, 2006–2015: a nationwide cohort study from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop 2019; 90(5): 489-94. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2019.1633759.
    1. Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (DSR).. Annual Report 2020 [cited 2021, February 24]. Available from: .
    1. Rasmussen J V, Polk A, Brorson S, Sørensen A K, Olsen B S. Patient-reported outcome and risk of revision after shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis: 1,209 cases from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry, 2006–2010. Acta Orthop 2014; 85(2): 117-22. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.893497.
    1. Rasmussen J V, Olsen B S. The Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry. Obere Extrem 2019; 14(3): 173-8. doi: 10.1007/s11678-019-0524-2.
    1. Craig R S, Lane J C E, Carr A J, Furniss D, Collins G S, Rees J L. Serious adverse events and lifetime risk of reoperation after elective shoulder replacement: population based cohort study using hospital episode statistics for England. BMJ 2019; 364: l298. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l298.
    1. Shields E, Wiater J M. Patient outcomes after revision of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty to reverse shoulder arthroplasty for rotator cuff failure or component loosening: a matched cohort study. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2019; 27(4): e193-e8. doi: 10.5435/jaaos-d-17-00350.
    1. Ravi V, Murphy R J, Moverley R, Derias M, Phadnis J. Outcome and complications following revision shoulder arthroplasty. Bone Jt Open 2021; 2(8): 618-30. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.28.Bjo-2021-0092.R1.
    1. Izquierdo R, Voloshin I, Edwards S, Freehill M Q, Stanwood W, Wiater J M, et al. . Treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2010; 18(6): 375-82. doi: 10.5435/00124635-201006000-00010.
    1. Singh J A, Sperling J, Buchbinder R, McMaken K. Surgery for shoulder osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010(10). doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008089.pub2.
    1. Floyd S B, Chapman C G, Shanley E, Ruffrage L, Matthia E, Cooper P, et al. . A comparison of one-year treatment utilization for shoulder osteoarthritis patients initiating care with non-orthopaedic physicians and orthopaedic specialists. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2018; 19(1): 349. doi: 10.1186/s12891-018-2268-3.
    1. Samilson R L, Prieto V. Dislocation arthropathy of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983; 65(4): 456-60. PubMed PMID: .
    1. Slade S C, Dionne C E, Underwood M, Buchbinder R, Beck B, Bennell K, et al. . Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT): Modified Delphi Study. Phys Ther 2016; 96(10): 1514-24. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20150668.
    1. Taul-Madsen L, Kjeldsen T, Skou S T, Mechlenburg I, Dalgas U. Exercise booster sessions as a means to maintain the effect of an exercise-intervention: a systematic review. Phys Ther Rev 2021:1-11. doi: 10.1080/10833196.2021.1988816.
    1. Rasmussen J V, Jakobsen J, Olsen B S, Brorson S. Translation and validation of the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index: the Danish version. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 2013; 4:49-54. doi: 10.2147/PROM.S50976.
    1. Lindenhovius A, Buijze G, Kloen P, Ring D. Correspondence between perceived disability and objective physical impairment after elbow trauma. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90: 2090-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00793.
    1. Niemeijer A, Lund H, Stafne S N, Ipsen T, Goldschmidt C L, Jørgensen C T, et al. . Adverse events of exercise therapy in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2020. ; 54(18): 1073. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-100461.
    1. Boileau P. Complications and revision of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2016; 102(1 Suppl.): S33-43. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.06.031.
    1. Rasmussen J V, Hole R, Metlie T, Brorson S, Aarimaa V, Demir Y, et al. . Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty used for glenohumeral osteoarthritis has higher survival rates than hemiarthroplasty: a Nordic registry-based study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2018; 26(5): 659-65. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2018.02.896.
    1. Rasmussen J V, Jakobsen J, Brorson S, Olsen B S. The Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry: clinical outcome and short-term survival of 2,137 primary shoulder replacements. Acta Orthop 2012; 83(2): 171-3. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.665327.
    1. Sliepen M, Lipperts M, Tjur M, Mechlenburg I. Use of accelerometer-based activity monitoring in orthopaedics: benefits, impact and practical considerations. EFORT Open Rev 2020; 4(12): 678-85. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180041.
    1. Bouwmans C, Krol M, Severens H, Koopmanschap M, Brouwer W, Hakkaart-van Roijen L. The iMTA Productivity Cost Questionnaire: a standardized instrument for measuring and valuing health-related productivity losses. Value Health 2015; 18(6): 753-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.05.009.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren