Dataset Information

Effect of Biomechanical Footwear on Knee Pain in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: The BIOTOK Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Individually calibrated biomechanical footwear therapy may improve pain and physical function in people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, but the benefits of this therapy are unclear.

Objective

To assess the effect of a biomechanical footwear therapy vs control footwear over 24 weeks of follow-up.

Design, setting, and participants

Randomized clinical trial conducted at a Swiss university hospital. Participants (N = 220) with symptomatic, radiologically confirmed knee osteoarthritis were recruited between April 20, 2015, and January 10, 2017. The last participant visit occurred on August 15, 2017.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to biomechanical footwear involving shoes with individually adjustable external convex pods attached to the outsole (n = 111) or to control footwear (n = 109) that had visible outsole pods that were not adjustable and did not create a convex walking surface.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was knee pain at 24 weeks of follow-up assessed with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain subscore standardized to range from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms). The secondary outcomes included WOMAC physical function and stiffness subscores and the WOMAC global score, all ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (extreme symptoms) at 24 weeks of follow-up, and serious adverse events.

Results

Among the 220 randomized participants (mean age, 65.2 years [SD, 9.3 years]; 104 women [47.3%]), 219 received the allocated treatment and 213 (96.8%) completed follow-up. At 24 weeks of follow-up, the mean standardized WOMAC pain subscore improved from 4.3 to 1.3 in the biomechanical footwear group and from 4.0 to 2.6 in the control footwear group (between-group difference in scores at 24 weeks of follow-up, -1.3 [95% CI, -1.8 to -0.9]; P < .001). The results were consistent for WOMAC physical function subscore (between-group difference, -1.1 [95% CI, -1.5 to -0.7]), WOMAC stiffness subscore (between-group difference, -1.4 [95% CI, -1.9 to -0.9]), and WOMAC global score (between-group difference, -1.2 [95% CI, -1.6 to -0.8]) at 24 weeks of follow-up. Three serious adverse events occurred in the biomechanical footwear group compared with 9 in the control footwear group (2.7% vs 8.3%, respectively); none were related to treatment.

Conclusions and relevance

Among participants with knee pain from osteoarthritis, use of biomechanical footwear compared with control footwear resulted in an improvement in pain at 24 weeks of follow-up that was statistically significant but of uncertain clinical importance. Further research would be needed to assess long-term efficacy and safety, as well as replication, before reaching conclusions about the clinical value of this device.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02363712.

SUBMITTER: Reichenbach S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7218497 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of Biomechanical Footwear on Knee Pain in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: The BIOTOK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Reichenbach Stephan S Felson David T DT Hincapié Cesar A CA Heldner Sarah S Bütikofer Lukas L Lenz Armando A da Costa Bruno R BR Bonel Harald M HM Jones Richard K RK Hawker Gillian A GA Jüni Peter P

JAMA 20200501 18

<h4>Importance</h4>Individually calibrated biomechanical footwear therapy may improve pain and physical function in people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, but the benefits of this therapy are unclear.<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the effect of a biomechanical footwear therapy vs control footwear over 24 weeks of follow-up.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>Randomized clinical trial conducted at a Swiss university hospital. Participants (N = 220) with symptomatic, radiologically confir ...[more]

PMID: 32396180

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThigh muscle weakness is associated with knee discomfort and osteoarthritis disease progression. Little is known about the efficacy of high-intensity strength training in patients with knee osteoarthritis or whether it may worsen knee symptoms.ObjectiveTo determine whether high-intensity strength training reduces knee pain and knee joint compressive forces more than low-intensity strength training and more than attention control in patients with knee osteoarthritis.Design, setting, and participantsAssessor-blinded randomized clinical trial conducted at a university research center in North Carolina that included 377 community-dwelling adults (≥50 years) with body mass index (BMI) ranging from 20 to 45 and with knee pain and radiographic knee osteoarthritis. Enrollment occurred between July 2012 and February 2016, and follow-up was completed September 2017.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to high-intensity strength training (n = 127), low-intensity strength training (n = 126), or attention control (n = 124).Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes at the 18-month follow-up were Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) knee pain (0 best-20 worst; minimally clinically important difference [MCID, 2]) and knee joint compressive force, defined as the maximal tibiofemoral contact force exerted along the long axis of the tibia during walking (MCID, unknown).ResultsAmong 377 randomized participants (mean age, 65 years; 151 women [40%]), 320 (85%) completed the trial. Mean adjusted (sex, baseline BMI, baseline outcome values) WOMAC pain scores at the 18-month follow-up were not statistically significantly different between the high-intensity group and the control group (5.1 vs 4.9; adjusted difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1; P = .61) or between the high-intensity and low-intensity groups (5.1 vs 4.4; adjusted difference, 0.7; 95% CI, -0.1 to 1.6; P = .08). Mean knee joint compressive forces were not statistically significantly different between the high-intensity group and the control group (2453 N vs 2512 N; adjusted difference, -58; 95% CI, -282 to 165 N; P = .61), or between the high-intensity and low-intensity groups (2453 N vs 2475 N; adjusted difference, -21; 95% CI, -235 to 193 N; P = .85). There were 87 nonserious adverse events (high-intensity, 53; low-intensity, 30; control, 4) and 13 serious adverse events unrelated to the study (high-intensity, 5; low-intensity, 3; control, 5).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with knee osteoarthritis, high-intensity strength training compared with low-intensity strength training or an attention control did not significantly reduce knee pain or knee joint compressive forces at 18 months. The findings do not support the use of high-intensity strength training over low-intensity strength training or an attention control in adults with knee osteoarthritis.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01489462.

Project description:ImportanceSynovitis is common and is associated with progression of structural characteristics of knee osteoarthritis. Intra-articular corticosteroids could reduce cartilage damage associated with synovitis but might have adverse effects on cartilage and periarticular bone.ObjectiveTo determine the effects of intra-articular injection of 40 mg of triamcinolone acetonide every 3 months on progression of cartilage loss and knee pain.Design, setting, and participantsTwo-year, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of intra-articular triamcinolone vs saline for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis with ultrasonic features of synovitis in 140 patients. Mixed-effects regression models with a random intercept were used to analyze the longitudinal repeated outcome measures. Patients fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology criteria for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, Kellgren-Lawrence grades 2 or 3, were enrolled at Tufts Medical Center beginning February 11, 2013; all patients completed the study by January 1, 2015.InterventionsIntra-articular triamcinolone (n = 70) or saline (n = 70) every 12 weeks for 2 years.Main outcomes and measuresAnnual knee magnetic resonance imaging for quantitative evaluation of cartilage volume (minimal clinically important difference not yet defined), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index collected every 3 months (Likert pain subscale range, 0 [no pain] to 20 [extreme pain]; minimal clinically important improvement, 3.94).ResultsAmong 140 randomized patients (mean age, 58 [SD, 8] years, 75 women [54%]), 119 (85%) completed the study. Intra-articular triamcinolone resulted in significantly greater cartilage volume loss than did saline for a mean change in index compartment cartilage thickness of -0.21 mm vs -0.10 mm (between-group difference, -0.11 mm; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.03 mm); and no significant difference in pain (-1.2 vs -1.9; between-group difference, -0.6; 95% CI, -1.6 to 0.3). The saline group had 3 treatment-related adverse events compared with 5 in the triamcinolone group and had a small increase in hemoglobin A1c levels (between-group difference, -0.2%; 95% CI, -0.5% to -0.007%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, 2 years of intra-articular triamcinolone, compared with intra-articular saline, resulted in significantly greater cartilage volume loss and no significant difference in knee pain. These findings do not support this treatment for patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01230424.

Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis (OA) and lower back pain (LBP) are most common health problems which lead to pain and disability. This study aimed to systematically review the evidence to find any relationship between knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and LBP or any potential causation.MethodsThe databases of Scopus, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched from inception to 01 October 2022. Any study published in English assessing live humans over 18 years with KOA and LBP was eligible to be included. Studies were independently screened by two researchers. Data of the included studies were extracted based on the participants, outcomes related to knee and lumbar spine, reported association or causation between LBP and KOA, and study design. Data were narratively analyzed and presented as graphs and table. Methodology quality was assessed.ResultsOf 9953 titles and abstracts, duplicates were removed, and 7552 were screened. Altogether, 88 full texts were screened, and 13 were eligible for the final inclusion. There were some biomechanical and clinical causations were observed for the concurrent presence of LBP and KOA. Biomechanically, high pelvic incidence is a risk factor for development of spondylolisthesis and KOA. Clinically, knee pain intensity was higher in KOA when presents with LBP. Less than 20% of studies have justified their sample size during the quality assessment.DiscussionDevelopment and progression of KOA in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis may be induced by significantly greater mismatches of lumbo-pelvic sagittal alignment. Elderly patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and severe KOA reported a different pelvic morphology, increased sagittal malalignment with a lack of lumbar lordosis due to double-level listhesis, and greater knee flexion contracture than in patients with no to mild and moderate KOA. People with concurrent LBP and KOA have reported poor function with more disability. Both LBP and lumbar kyphosis indicate functional disability and knee symptoms in patients with KOA.ConclusionsDifferent biomechanical and clinical causations were revealed for the concurrent existence of KOA and LBP. Therefore, careful assessment of both back and knee joints should be considered when treating KOA and vice versa.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022238571.

Project description:ImportanceSome weight loss and exercise programs that have been successful in academic center-based trials have not been evaluated in community settings.ObjectiveTo determine whether adaptation of a diet and exercise intervention to community settings resulted in a statistically significant reduction in pain, compared with an attention control group, at 18-month follow-up.Design, setting, and participantsAssessor-blinded randomized clinical trial conducted in community settings in urban and rural counties in North Carolina. Patients were men and women aged 50 years or older with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity (body mass index ≥27). Enrollment (N = 823) occurred between May 2016 and August 2019, with follow-up ending in April 2021.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to either a diet and exercise intervention (n = 414) or an attention control (n = 409) group for 18 months.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the between-group difference in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) knee pain score (range, 0 [none] to 20 [severe]; minimum clinically important difference, 1.6) over 18 months, tested using a repeated-measures mixed linear model with adjustments for covariates. There were 7 secondary outcomes including body weight.ResultsAmong the 823 randomized patients (mean age, 64.6 years; 637 [77%] women), 658 (80%) completed the trial. At 18-month follow-up, the adjusted mean WOMAC pain score was 5.0 in the diet and exercise group (n = 329) compared with 5.5 in the attention control group (n = 316) (adjusted difference, -0.6; 95% CI, -1.0 to -0.1; P = .02). Of 7 secondary outcomes, 5 were significantly better in the intervention group compared with control. The mean change in unadjusted 18-month body weight for patients with available data was -7.7 kg (8%) in the diet and exercise group (n = 289) and -1.7 kg (2%) in the attention control group (n = 273) (mean difference, -6.0 kg; 95% CI, -7.3 kg to -4.7 kg). There were 169 serious adverse events; none were definitely related to the study. There were 729 adverse events; 32 (4%) were definitely related to the study, including 10 body injuries (9 in diet and exercise; 1 in attention control), 7 muscle strains (6 in diet and exercise; 1 in attention control), and 6 trip/fall events (all 6 in diet and exercise).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity, diet and exercise compared with an attention control led to a statistically significant but small difference in knee pain over 18 months. The magnitude of the difference in pain between groups is of uncertain clinical importance.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02577549.

Project description:ImportanceIntra-articular (IA) glucocorticoid injection is widely used in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), but the safety of this technique is in question among physicians. Intramuscular (IM) glucocorticoid injection could be an alternative approach.ObjectiveTo investigate whether an IM glucocorticoid injection is noninferior to an IA glucocorticoid injection in reducing knee pain for patients with knee OA in primary care.Design, setting, and participantsThe KIS trial, a multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical noninferiority trial including patients with symptomatic knee OA, was conducted in 80 primary care general practices in the southwest of the Netherlands. The study was conducted from March 1, 2018, to July 28, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomly allocated to receive an injection of triamcinolone acetonide, 40 mg, either IM in the ipsilateral ventrogluteal region or IA in the knee joint. All patients were followed up for 24 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe pain score at 4 weeks measured with Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (range, 0-100; 0 indicates extreme pain), with a noninferiority margin of -7 (IM minus IA). A per-protocol analysis was prespecified as the primary analysis.ResultsA total of 145 patients (94 women [65%]; mean [SD] age, 67 [10] years) were included; of these, 138 patients (IM, 72; IA, 66) were included in the per-protocol analysis. Clinically relevant improvements in knee pain were reached up to 12 weeks after the injection in both groups. At 4 weeks, the estimated mean difference in the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score between the 2 groups was -3.4 (95% CI, -10.1 to 3.3). Noninferiority could not be declared because the lower limit exceeded the noninferiority margin. Intramuscular injection was noninferior to IA injection at 8 (mean difference, 0.7; 95% CI, -6.5 to 7.8) and 24 (mean difference, 1.6; 95% CI, -5.7 to 9.0) weeks. No significant difference was found among all the secondary outcomes. These results were similar for the sensitivity analysis in an intention-to-treat population. The most frequently reported adverse events were hot flush (IM, 7 [10%] vs IA, 14 [21%]) and headache (IM, 10 [14%] vs IA, 12 [18%]), and all events were classified as nonserious.Conclusions and relevanceBased on the findings of this trial, among patients with knee OA in primary care, IM glucocorticoid injection could present an inferior effect in reducing pain at 4 weeks compared with IA injection. Noninferiority of an IM injection was observed at 8 and 24 weeks after injection. This trial provides data for shared decision-making, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of both types of injections.Trial registrationDutch Trial Registry: NTR6968.

Project description:ImportanceMultidisciplinary prehabilitation before total knee replacement (TKR) for osteoarthritis may improve outcomes in the postoperative period.ObjectiveTo compare multidisciplinary prehabilitation with usual care before TKR for osteoarthritis in terms of functional independence and activity limitations after surgery.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective, open-label randomized clinical trial recruited participants 50 to 85 years of age with knee osteoarthritis according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria for whom a TKR was scheduled at 3 French tertiary care centers. Recruitment started on October 4, 2012, with follow-up completed on November 29, 2017. Statistical analyses were conducted from March 29, 2018, to March 6, 2019.InterventionsFour supervised sessions of multidisciplinary rehabilitation and education (2 sessions per week, at least 2 months before TKR, delivered to groups of 4-6 participants at each investigating center; session duration was 90 minutes and included 30 minutes of education followed by 60 minutes of exercise therapy) or usual care (information booklet and standard advice by the orthopedic surgeon) before TKR.Main outcomes and measuresThe short-term primary end point was the proportion of participants achieving functional independence a mean (SD) of 4 (1) days after surgery defined as level 3 on the 4 functional tests. The midterm primary end point was activity limitations within 6 months after TKR assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the self-administered Western Ontario Questionnaire and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index function subscale.ResultsA total of 262 patients (mean [SD] age, 68.6 [8.0] years; 178 women [68%]) were randomized (131 to each group). A mean (SD) of 4 (1) days after surgery, 34 of 101 (34%) in the experimental group vs 26 of 95 (27%) in the control group achieved functional independence (risk ratio, 1.4; 97.5% CI, 0.9-2.1; P = .15). At 6 months, the mean (SD) area under the curve for the Western Ontario Questionnaire and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index function subscale was 38.1 (16.5) mm2 in the experimental group vs 40.6 (17.8) mm2 in the control group (absolute difference, -2.8 mm2; 97.5% CI, -7.8 to 2.3; P = .31 after multiple imputation). No differences were found in secondary outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized clinical trial found no evidence that multidisciplinary prehabilitation before TKR for osteoarthritis improves short-term functional independence or reduces midterm activity limitations after surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01671917.

Dataset Information

Effect of Biomechanical Footwear on Knee Pain in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: The BIOTOK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Interventions

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Trial registration

Publications

Effect of Biomechanical Footwear on Knee Pain in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: The BIOTOK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets