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

Exercise and manual physiotherapy arthritis research trial (EMPART): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip is a major cause of functional disability and reduced quality of life. Management options aim to reduce pain and improve or maintain physical functioning. Current evidence indicates that therapeutic exercise has a beneficial but short-term effect on pain and disability, with poor long-term benefit. The optimal content, duration and type of exercise are yet to be ascertained. There has been little scientific investigation into the effectiveness of manual therapy in hip OA. Only one randomized controlled trial (RCT) found greater improvements in patient-perceived improvement and physical function with manual therapy, compared to exercise therapy. METHODS AND DESIGN: An assessor-blind multicentre RCT will be undertaken to compare the effect of a combination of manual therapy and exercise therapy, exercise therapy only, and a waiting-list control on physical function in hip OA. One hundred and fifty people with a diagnosis of hip OA will be recruited and randomly allocated to one of 3 groups: exercise therapy, exercise therapy with manual therapy and a waiting-list control. Subjects in the intervention groups will attend physiotherapy for 6-8 sessions over 8 weeks. Those in the control group will remain on the waiting list until after this time and will then be re-randomised to one of the two intervention groups. Outcome measures will include physical function (WOMAC), pain severity (numerical rating scale), patient perceived change (7-point Likert scale), quality of life (SF-36), mood (hospital anxiety and depression scale), patient satisfaction, physical activity (IPAQ) and physical measures of range of motion, 50-foot walk and repeated sit-to stand tests. DISCUSSION: This RCT will compare the effectiveness of the addition of manual therapy to exercise therapy to exercise therapy only and a waiting-list control in hip OA. A high quality methodology will be used in keeping with CONSORT guidelines. The results will contribute to the evidence base regarding the clinical efficacy for physiotherapy interventions in hip OA

Point-of-care testing in paediatric settings in the UK and Ireland: A cross-sectional study

Background: Point-of-care testing (POCT) is diagnostic testing performed at or near to the site of the patient. Understanding the current capacity, and scope, of POCT in this setting is essential in order to respond to new research evidence which may lead to wide implementation. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey study of POCT use was conducted between 6th January and 2nd February 2020 on behalf of two United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland-based paediatric research networks (Paediatric Emergency Research UK and Ireland, and General and Adolescent Paediatric Research UK and Ireland). Results: In total 91/109 (83.5%) sites responded, with some respondents providing details for multiple units on their site based on network membership (139 units in total). The most commonly performed POCT were blood sugar (137/139; 98.6%), urinalysis (134/139; 96.4%) and blood gas analysis (132/139; 95%). The use of POCT for Influenza/Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) (45/139; 32.4%, 41/139; 29.5%), C-Reactive Protein (CRP) (13/139; 9.4%), Procalcitonin (PCT) (2/139; 1.4%) and Group A Streptococcus (5/139; 3.6%) and was relatively low. Obstacles to the introduction of new POCT included resources and infrastructure to support test performance and quality assurance. Conclusion: This survey demonstrates significant consensus in POCT practice in the UK and Ireland but highlights specific inequity in newer biomarkers, some which do not have support from national guidance. A clear strategy to overcome the key obstacles of funding, evidence base, and standardising variation will be essential if there is a drive toward increasing implementation of POCT