Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2020 Oct 13:371:m3576.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.m3576.

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

David F Hamilton  1 , David J Beard  2 , Karen L Barker  2 , Gary J Macfarlane  3 , Christopher E Tuck  4 , Andrew Stoddart  4 , Timothy Wilton  5 , James D Hutchinson  6 , Gordon D Murray  4 , A Hamish R W Simpson  7 ; TRIO investigators
Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

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

David F Hamilton et al. BMJ. .

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

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.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Flow of participants through the study
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

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. www.hqip.org.uk/resource/national-joint-registry-14th-annual-report-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 - DOI - PubMed
    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 - DOI - PubMed
    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 - DOI - PubMed
    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 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data