Dataset Information

Factors associated with fatigue in hip and/or knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and best evidence synthesis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim was systematically to identify and evaluate factors related to fatigue in individuals with hip and/or knee OA.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted using AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, ProQuest and Web of Science Core Collections databases. Inclusion criteria comprised cross-sectional, case-control or longitudinal studies on patients with a diagnosis of hip and/or knee OA that included self-reported fatigue measures. Study quality was assessed using the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute quality appraisal tool, and factors were synthesized within a bio-behavioural framework. Study designs and quality were combined to determine current evidence levels using best evidence synthesis grading. The full review protocol is available from PROSPERO (PROSPERO 2019: CRD42019138571).

Results

Twenty-four studies were included, of which 19 were high, 4 moderate and 1 low quality. There was strong evidence of an association between poor self-reported physical function and high depressive symptoms with higher fatigue. Moderate evidence of an association was found between severe pain, high numbers of co-morbidities and low physical activity levels with higher fatigue. There was moderate or limited evidence of no association between most sociodemographic factors and radiographic OA severity with fatigue.

Conclusion

Targets for fatigue management might include improving physical function, reducing depressive symptoms, pain and co-morbidities, and increasing physical activity levels. There is a need for more rigorous longitudinal studies to understand the causal effect of fatigue determinants within the hip and knee OA populations.

SUBMITTER: Fawole HO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8068317 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Physical activity (PA), including engagement in structured exercise, has a key role in the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, maintaining a physically active lifestyle is a challenge for people with OA. PA determinants in this population need to be understood better so that they can be optimised by public health or healthcare interventions and social policy changes. OBJECTIVES:The primary aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of the existing qualitative evidence on barriers and facilitators of PA for patients with hip or knee OA. Secondary objective is to explore differences in barriers and facilitators between (1) lifestyle PA and exercise and (2) PA uptake and maintenance. METHODS:Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Grey literature and qualitative journals were searched. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme-Qualitative checklist and Lincoln and Guba's criteria were used for quality appraisal. Thematic synthesis was applied. FINDINGS:Ten studies were included, seven focusing on exercise regimes, three on overall PA. The findings showed a good fit with the biopsychosocial model of health. Aiming at symptom relief and mobility, positive exercise experiences and beliefs, knowledge, a 'keep going' attitude, adjusting and prioritising PA, having healthcare professionals' and social support emerged as PA facilitators. Pain and physical limitations; non-positive PA experiences, beliefs and information; OA-related distress; a resigned attitude; lack of motivation, behavioural regulation, professional support and negative social comparison with coexercisers were PA barriers. All themes were supported by high and medium quality studies. Paucity of data did not allow for the secondary objectives to be explored. CONCLUSION:Our findings reveal a complex interplay among physical, personal including psychological and social-environmental factors corresponding to the facilitation and hindrance of PA, particularly exercise, engagement. Further research on the efficacy of individualised patient education, psychological interventions or social policy change to promote exercise engagement and lifestyle PA in individuals with lower limb OA is required. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42016030024.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify risk factors for pain and functional deterioration in people with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) to form the basis of a future 'stratification tool' for OA development or progression.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsAn electronic search of the literature databases, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science (1990-February 2020), was conducted. Studies that identified risk factors for pain and functional deterioration to knee and hip OA were included. Where data and study heterogeneity permitted, meta-analyses presenting mean difference (MD) and ORs with corresponding 95% CIs were undertaken. Where this was not possible, a narrative analysis was undertaken. The Downs & Black tool assessed methodological quality of selected studies before data extraction. Pooled analysis outcomes were assessed and reported using the Grading of Reccomendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results82 studies (41 810 participants) were included. On meta-analysis: there was moderate quality evidence that knee OA pain was associated with factors including: Kellgren and Lawrence≥2 (MD: 2.04, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.81; p<0.01), increasing age (MD: 1.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.66; p=0.02) and whole-organ MRI scoring method (WORMS) knee effusion score ≥1 (OR: 1.35, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.83; p=0.05). On narrative analysis: knee OA pain was associated with factors including WORMS meniscal damage ≥1 (OR: 1.83). Predictors of joint pain in hip OA were large acetabular bone marrow lesions (BML; OR: 5.23), chronic widespread pain (OR: 5.02) and large hip BMLs (OR: 4.43).ConclusionsOur study identified risk factors for clinical pain in OA by imaging measures that can assist in predicting and stratifying people with knee/hip OA. A 'stratification tool' combining verified risk factors that we have identified would allow selective stratification based on pain and structural outcomes in OA.Prospero registration numberCRD42018117643.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally osteoarthritis of the knee is a leading cause of disability. Hip abductor strength and activation are essential for maintaining postural balance during transfers and are related to joint loading and progression during weight-bearing activities. Strength deficits in the hip abductors might cause a reduction in the lower extremity force generation, thereby causing stress on the medial tibiofemoral joint. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of hip abductor strengthening on knee joint loading, knee pain and functional outcome measures in patients with knee osteoarthritis.MethodsDatabase such as Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database and PEDro were reviewed to recognize the trials published in English from inception to December 2020. Randomized controlled trials that studied the effectiveness of hip abductor strengthening in subjects with knee osteoarthritis and its impact on knee joint loading, knee pain and functional outcome measures were included. RevMan 5.4 was used for meta-analysis and forest plot construction. Quality assessment of the included studies was carried out using the PEDro scale.Results and discussionThe search yielded 260 results of which 29 full-text articles were screened. The review includes 7 randomized controlled trials and 3 studies with good methodological quality were included for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis of the articles favored hip abductor strengthening intervention over the control group. Hip abductor strengthening had significantly reduced the VAS [ SMD = -0.60[-0.88, -0.33] p < 0.0001]at 95% CI and improved the WOMAC scores [SMD - 0.75[-1.05,-0.45] p < 0.0001] at 95% CI. All of the included studies concluded that strengthening the hip abductor muscle had a positive impact on knee pain and functional outcomes.ConclusionThe current study found high-quality evidence to support the use of hip abductor muscle strengthening exercises as a rehabilitative treatment for subjects with knee osteoarthritis.Trial registrationCRD42021256251 .

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways following total hip and knee arthroplasties. Secondary objectives were to report on quality of studies and identify research gaps for future work. DESIGN:Systematic review of cost-utility analyses. DATA SOURCES:Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database and EconLit, January 2000 to August 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:English-language peer-reviewed cost-utility analyses of enhanced recovery pathways, or components of one, compared with usual care, in patients having total hip or knee arthroplasties for osteoarthritis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Data extracted by three reviewers with disagreements resolved by a fourth. Study quality assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list, the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and Assessment of the Validation Status of Health-Economic decision models tools; for trial-based studies the Cochrane Collaboration's tool to assess risk of bias. No quantitative synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS:We identified 17 studies: five trial-based and 12 model-based studies. Two analyses evaluated entire enhanced recovery pathways and reported them to be cost-effective compared with usual care. Ten pathway components were more effective and cost-saving compared with usual care, three were cost-effective, and two were not cost-effective. We had concerns around risk of bias for all included studies, particularly regarding the short time horizon of the trials and lack of reporting of model validation. CONCLUSIONS:Consistent results supported enhanced recovery pathways as a whole, prophylactic systemic antibiotics, antibiotic-impregnated cement and conventional ventilation for infection prevention. No other interventions were subject of more than one study. We found ample scope for future cost-effectiveness studies, particularly analyses of entire recovery pathways and comparison of incremental changes within pathways. A key limitation is that standard practices have changed over the period covered by the included studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017059473.