Future directions for the management of pain in osteoarthritis.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the predominant form of arthritis worldwide, resulting in a high degree of functional impairment and reduced quality of life owing to chronic pain. To date, there are no treatments that are known to modify disease progression of OA in the long term. Current treatments are largely based on the modulation of pain, including NSAIDs, opiates and, more recently, centrally acting pharmacotherapies to avert pain. This review will focus on the rationale for new avenues in pain modulation, including inhibition with anti-NGF antibodies and centrally acting analgesics. The authors also consider the potential for structure modification in cartilage/bone using growth factors and stem cell therapies. The possible mismatch between structural change and pain perception will also be discussed, introducing recent techniques that may assist in improved patient phenotyping of pain subsets in OA. Such developments could help further stratify subgroups and treatments for people with OA in future

Recommendations for the reporting of harms in manuscripts on clinical trials assessing osteoarthritis drugs: A consensus statement from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO)

Background: There is strong evidence of under-reporting of harms in manuscripts on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared with the volume of raw data retrieved from these trials. Many guidelines have been developed to tackle this, but they have failed to address some important issues that would allow for standardization and transparency. As a consequence, harms reporting in manuscripts remains suboptimal. Objective: The European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) aimed to deliver accurate recommendations for better reporting of harms in clinical trials manuscripts on anti-osteoarthritis (OA) drugs. These could help to better inform clinicians on harms recorded in RCTs and further help researchers conducting meta-analyses. Methods: Using the outcomes of several systematic reviews on the safety of anti-OA drugs, we summarized the ways in which harms have been reported in OA RCT manuscripts to date. Next, we drafted some recommendations and initiated a modified Delphi process that involved a panel of clinicians and clinical researchers to build an expert consensus on recommendations from the ESCEO for the reporting of harms in future manuscripts on RCTs assessing anti-OA drugs. Results: These recommendations emphasize that all treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) should always be taken into account for harms reporting, with no frequency threshold, and describe how specific AEs should be reported; they also provide a list of the most relevant organ systems to be considered according to each class of drug for reporting of harms within the results section of a manuscript. Irrespective of the drug, the ESCEO recommends that total, severe and serious AEs and withdrawals due to AEs should always be reported; guidance on the reporting of specific events pertaining to each category is provided. The ESCEO also recommends the reporting of information on drug effect on biological parameters, with specific guidance. Conclusions: These recommendations may contribute to improve transparency in the field of safety of anti-OA medications. Pharmaceutical companies developing drugs for OA, and researchers conducting clinical trials, are encouraged to comply with them when reporting harms-related results in manuscripts on RCTs. The ESCEO also encourages journals to refer to the ESCEO recommendations in their instructions to authors for the publication of manuscripts on trials of anti-OA medications

Effect of TENS on pain in relation to central sensitization in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Central sensitization has recently been documented in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OAk). So far, the presence of central sensitization has not been considered as a confounding factor in studies assessing the pain inhibitory effect of tens on osteoarthritis of the knee. The purpose of this study is to explore the pain inhibitory effect of burst tens in OAk patients and to explore the prognostic value of central sensitization on the pain inhibitory effect of tens in OAk patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with knee pain due to OAk will be recruited through advertisements in local media. Temporal summation, before and after a heterotopic noxious conditioning stimulation, will be measured. In addition, pain on a numeric rating score, WOMAC subscores for pain and function and global perceived effect will be assessed. Patients will be randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups (tens, sham tens). Follow-up measurements will be scheduled after a period of 6 and 12 weeks.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Tens influences pain through the electrical stimulation of low-threshold A-beta cutaneous fibers. The responsiveness of central pain-signaling neurons of centrally sensitized OAk patients may be augmented to the input of these electrical stimuli. This would encompass an adverse therapy effect of tens. To increase treatment effectiveness it might be interesting to identify a subgroup of symptomatic OAk patients, i.e., non-sensitized patients, who are likely to benefit from burst tens.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01390285">NCT01390285</a></p

Effectiveness of a new model of primary care management on knee pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis: Protocol for THE PARTNER STUDY

© 2018 The Author(s). Background: To increase the uptake of key clinical recommendations for non-surgical management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) and improve patient outcomes, we developed a new model of service delivery (PARTNER model) and an intervention to implement the model in the Australian primary care setting. We will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this model compared to usual general practice care. Methods: We will conduct a mixed-methods study, including a two-arm, cluster randomised controlled trial, with quantitative, qualitative and economic evaluations. We will recruit 44 general practices and 572 patients with knee OA in urban and regional practices in Victoria and New South Wales. The interventions will target both general practitioners (GPs) and their patients at the practice level. Practices will be randomised at a 1:1 ratio. Patients will be recruited if they are aged =45 years and have experienced knee pain =4/10 on a numerical rating scale for more than three months. Outcomes are self-reported, patient-level validated measures with the primary outcomes being change in pain and function at 12 months. Secondary outcomes will be assessed at 6 and 12 months. The implementation intervention will support and provide education to intervention group GPs to deliver effective management for patients with knee OA using tailored online training and electronic medical record support. Participants with knee OA will have an initial GP visit to confirm their diagnosis and receive management according to GP intervention or control group allocation. As part of the intervention group GP management, participants with knee OA will be referred to a centralised multidisciplinary service: the PARTNER Care Support Team (CST). The CST will be trained in behaviour change support and evidence-based knee OA management. They will work with patients to develop a collaborative action plan focussed on key self-management behaviours, and communicate with the patients' GPs. Patients receiving care by intervention group GPs will receive tailored OA educational materials, a leg muscle strengthening program, and access to a weight-loss program as appropriate and agreed. GPs in the control group will receive no additional training and their patients will receive usual care. Discussion: This project aims to address a major evidence-to-practice gap in primary care management of OA by evaluating a new service delivery model implemented with an intervention targeting GP practice behaviours to improve the health of people with knee OA. Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12617001595303, date of registration 1/12/2017

Tai Chi on psychological well-being: systematic review and meta-analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Physical activity and exercise appear to improve psychological health. However, the quantitative effects of Tai Chi on psychological well-being have rarely been examined. We systematically reviewed the effects of Tai Chi on stress, anxiety, depression and mood disturbance in eastern and western populations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eight English and 3 Chinese databases were searched through March 2009. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled studies and observational studies reporting at least 1 psychological health outcome were examined. Data were extracted and verified by 2 reviewers. The randomized trials in each subcategory of health outcomes were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. The quality of each study was assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Forty studies totaling 3817 subjects were identified. Approximately 29 psychological measurements were assessed. Twenty-one of 33 randomized and nonrandomized trials reported that 1 hour to 1 year of regular Tai Chi significantly increased psychological well-being including reduction of stress (effect size [ES], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 1.09), anxiety (ES, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.03), and depression (ES, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.80), and enhanced mood (ES, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.69) in community-dwelling healthy participants and in patients with chronic conditions. Seven observational studies with relatively large sample sizes reinforced the beneficial association between Tai Chi practice and psychological health.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Tai Chi appears to be associated with improvements in psychological well-being including reduced stress, anxiety, depression and mood disturbance, and increased self-esteem. Definitive conclusions were limited due to variation in designs, comparisons, heterogeneous outcomes and inadequate controls. High-quality, well-controlled, longer randomized trials are needed to better inform clinical decisions.</p