Clinical features of low back pain in people with hip osteoarthritis: A cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is commonly reported in people with hip osteoarthritis (OA) and is a poor prognostic indicator of outcome in OA. This study aimed to identify the clinical features associated with LBP in people with hip OA attending orthopaedic and rheumatology clinics. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was undertaken. Twenty-four people with radiographically confirmed OA were recruited and completed self-report questionnaires for hip and LBP severity (Visual Analogue Scale), hip-related disability (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) and back-related disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire). Physical examination comprised spinal palpation, pelvic girdle pain provocation tests and hip and spinal range of motion tests. Between-group (presence/absence of LBP) differences in self-report and physical examination items were compared using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-squared tests. RESULTS: A total of 16/24 (66.7%) patients reported LBP. Those with LBP were younger, reported more pain locations and had higher self-report pain and disability. On physical examination, people with LBP and OA hip had reduced hip flexion, greater pain provocation with hip abduction, hip lateral rotation, spinal palpation and a greater number of painful pelvic girdle tests and spinal level palpation. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of patients with hip OA should incorporate examination of the lumbar spine and pelvic regions. It appears from our study that LBP is a common co-morbidity in those with OA of the hip and may indicate greater severity of hip disease, although the small sample size limits interpretation of results. Further research should investigate the exact relationships between presence of LBP and hip OA

Exercise and manual physiotherapy arthritis research trial (EMPART) for osteoarthritis of the hip: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of exercise therapy (ET) compared with ET with adjunctive manual therapy (MT) for people with hip osteoarthritis (OA); and to identify if immediate commencement of treatment (ET or ET+MT) was more beneficial than a 9-week waiting period for either intervention. DESIGN: Assessor-blind randomized controlled trial with a 9-week and 18-week follow-up. SETTING: Four academic teaching hospitals in Dublin, Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (N=131) with hip OA recruited from general practitioners, rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, and other hospital consultants were randomized to 1 of 3 groups: ET (n=45), ET+MT (n=43), and waitlist controls (n=43). INTERVENTIONS: Participants in both the ET and ET+MT groups received up to 8 treatments over 8 weeks. Control group participants were rerandomized into either ET or ET+MT groups after 9 week follow-up. Their data were pooled with original treatment group data: ET (n=66) and ET+MT (n=65). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical function (PF) subscale. Secondary outcomes included physical performance, pain severity, hip range of motion (ROM), anxiety/depression, quality of life, medication usage, patient-perceived change, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in WOMAC PF between the ET (n=66) and ET+MT (n=65) groups at 9 weeks (mean difference, .09; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.93 to 3.11) or 18 weeks (mean difference, .42; 95% CI, -4.41 to 5.25), or between other outcomes, except patient satisfaction with outcomes, which was higher in the ET+MT group (P=.02). Improvements in WOMAC, hip ROM, and patient-perceived change occurred in both treatment groups compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported function, hip ROM, and patient-perceived improvement occurred after an 8-week program of ET for patients with OA of the hip. MT as an adjunct to exercise provided no further benefit, except for higher patient satisfaction with outcome

Osteoarthritis: 119. The Effectiveness of Exercise Therapy with and without Manual Therapy for Hip Osteoarthritis: A Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

Background: Current evidence indicates that exercise therapy (ET) has a short and medium-term benefit for hip osteoarthritis (OA), but evidence is inconclusive regarding the effect of manual therapy (MT). The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial was to determine the effectiveness of ET with and without MT on clinical outcomes for individuals with hip OA. A secondary aim was to ascertain the effect of an 8-week waiting period on outcomes. Methods: 131 men and women with hip OA recruited in four hospitals were initially randomised to one of three groups: ET (n = 45), a combination of ET and MT (n = 43) and wait-list control (n = 43). The two intervention groups underwent individualised ET or ET/MT for 8 weeks. Patients in the control group waited 8 weeks and were randomised to receive either ET or ET/MT after 9 week follow-up, and pooled with original treatment group data: ET (n = 66) and ET/ MT (n = 65). All participants were followed up at 9 and 18 weeks and the control group was reassessed at 27 weeks (18 weeks post-treatment) by the same blinded assessor. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Other outcomes included sit-to-stand, 50-foot walk test, pain severity, hip range of motion (ROM), anxiety, depression, quality of life (QOL), analgesic usage, physical activity, patient-perceived change and patient satisfaction. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed to determine within-group change and between-group differences for the three groups at baseline and 9 weeks, and the two treatment groups at baseline, 9 and 18 weeks. Results: Eight patients (6.1%) were lost to follow-up at 9 weeks and 19 (14.5%) were lost to follow-up by 18 weeks. Both ET (n = 66) and ET/MT groups (n = 65) showed significant within-group improvements in WOMAC, pain severity, sit-to-stand and HROM measures at 9 weeks, which were still evident at 18 weeks. There was no significant within-group change in anxiety, depression, QOL, analgesic usage, 50-foot walk test or physical activity. There was no significant difference between the two intervention groups for any of the outcomes. Regarding the results of the original ET, ET/MT and control group allocation, there was a significant improvement in one or both ET and ET/MT groups compared with the control group in the same outcomes, as well as patient perceived improvement at 9 weeks. There was no significant difference between the three groups in analgesic usage, WOMAC stiffness subscale, sit-to-stand and 50 foot walk tests, QOL and physical activity. There was an overall deterioration in anxiety and depression scores. Conclusions: The addition of MT to an 8 week programme of ET for hip OA resulted in similar improvements in pain, function and ROM at 9 and 18 weeks. The significant improvement which occurred in the same outcomes in the two treatment groups compared with a wait-list control of 8 weeks has implications for waiting list management Disclosure statement: The authors have declared no conflicts of interes

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. METHODS: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). FINDINGS: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29-146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0- 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25-1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39-1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65-1·60]; p=0·92). INTERPRETATION: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation

Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences

The stereotype content model (SCM) proposes potentially universal principles of societal stereotypes and their relation to social structure. Here, the SCM reveals theoretically grounded, cross-cultural, cross-groups similarities and one difference across 10 non-US nations. Seven European (individualist) and three East Asian (collectivist) nations (N 1⁄4 1; 028) support three hypothesized cross-cultural similarities: (a) perceived warmth and competence reliably differentiate societal group stereotypes; (b) many out-groups receive ambivalent stereotypes (high on one dimension; low on the other); and (c) high status groups stereotypically are competent, whereas competitive groups stereotypically lack warmth. Data uncover one consequential cross-cultural difference: (d) the more collectivist cultures do not locate reference groups (in-groups and societal prototype groups) in the most positive cluster (high-competence/high-warmth), unlike individualist cultures. This demonstrates out-group derogation without obvious reference-group favouritism. The SCM can serve as a pancultural tool for predicting group stereotypes from structural relations with other groups in society, and comparing across societies.UCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Sociales::Instituto de Investigaciones Psicológicas (IIP

Stereotype content model across cultures: towards universal similarities and some differences

The stereotype content model (SCM) proposes potentially universal principles of societal stereotypes and their relation to social structure. Here, the SCM reveals theoretically grounded, cross-cultural, cross-groups similarities and one difference across 10 non-US nations. Seven European (individualist) and three East Asian (collectivist) nations (N=1,028) support three hypothesized cross-cultural similarities: (a) perceived warmth and competence reliably differentiate societal group stereotypes; (b) many out-groups receive ambivalent stereotypes (high on one dimension; low on the other); and (c) high status groups stereotypically are competent, whereas competitive groups stereotypically lack warmth. Data uncover one consequential cross-cultural difference: (d) the more collectivist cultures do not locate reference groups (in-groups and societal prototype groups) in the most positive cluster (high-competence/high-warmth), unlike individualist cultures. This demonstrates out-group derogation without obvious reference-group favouritism. The SCM can serve as a pancultural tool for predicting group stereotypes from structural relations with other groups in society, and comparing across societies