Application of the health assessment questionnaire disability index to various rheumatic diseases

Purpose\ud \ud To investigate whether the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) can serve as a generic instrument for measuring disability across different rheumatic diseases and to propose a scoring method based on item response theory (IRT) modeling to support this goal.\ud \ud Methods\ud \ud The HAQ-DI was administered to a cross-sectional sample of patients with confirmed rheumatoid arthritis (n = 619), osteoarthritis (n = 125), or gout (n = 102). The results were analyzed using the generalized partial credit model as an IRT model.\ud \ud Results\ud \ud It was found that 4 out of 8 item categories of the HAQ-DI displayed substantial differential item functioning (DIF) over the three diseases. Further, it was shown that this DIF could be modeled using an IRT model with disease-specific item parameters, which produces measures that are comparable for the three diseases.\ud \ud Conclusion\ud \ud Although the HAQ-DI partially functioned differently in the three disease groups, the measurement regarding the disability level of the patients can be made comparable using IRT methods\u

Methods for specifying the target difference in a randomised controlled trial : the Difference ELicitation in TriAls (DELTA) systematic review

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

The effects of hip muscle strengthening on knee load, pain, and function in people with knee osteoarthritis: a protocol for a randomised, single-blind controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Lower limb strengthening exercises are an important component of the treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA). Strengthening the hip abductor and adductor muscles may influence joint loading and/or OA-related symptoms, but no study has evaluated these hypotheses directly. The aim of this randomised, single-blind controlled trial is to determine whether hip abductor and adductor muscle strengthening can reduce knee load and improve pain and physical function in people with medial compartment knee OA. METHODS/DESIGN: 88 participants with painful, radiographically confirmed medial compartment knee OA and varus alignment will be recruited from the community and randomly allocated to a hip strengthening or control group using concealed allocation stratified by disease severity. The hip strengthening group will perform 6 exercises to strengthen the hip abductor and adductor muscles at home 5 times per week for 12 weeks. They will consult with a physiotherapist on 7 occasions to be taught the exercises and progress exercise resistance. The control group will be requested to continue with their usual care. Blinded follow up assessment will be conducted at 12 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcome measure is the change in the peak external knee adduction moment measured during walking. Questionnaires will assess changes in pain and physical function as well as overall perceived rating of change. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed using linear regression modelling and adjusting for baseline outcome values and other demographic characteristics. DISCUSSION: Results from this trial will contribute to the evidence regarding the effect of hip strengthening on knee loads and symptoms in people with medial compartment knee OA. If shown to reduce the knee adduction moment, hip strengthening has the potential to slow disease progression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTR12607000001493

The relationship between change in subjective outcome and change in disease: a potential paradox

Contains fulltext : 87756.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Response shift theory suggests that improvements in health lead patients to change their internal standards and re-assess former health states as worse than initially rated when using retrospective ratings via the then-test. The predictions of response shift theory can be illustrated using prospect theory, whereby a change in current health causes a change in reference frame. Therefore, if health deteriorates, the former health state will receive a better rating, whereas if it improves, the former health state will receive a worse rating. OBJECTIVE: To explore the predictions of response shift and prospect theory by relating subjective change to objective change. METHODS: Baseline and 3-month follow-up data from a cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients (N = 197) starting on TNFalpha-blocking agents were used. Objective disease change was classified according to a disease-specific clinical outcome measure (DAS28). Visual analogue scales (VAS) for general health (GH) and pain were used as self-reported measures. Three months after starting on anti-TNFalpha, patients used the then-test to re-rate their baseline health with regard to general health and pain. Differences between then-test value and baseline values were calculated and tested between improved, non-improved and deteriorated patients by the Student t-test. RESULTS: At 3 months, 51 (25.9%) patients had good improvement in health, 83 (42.1%) had moderate improvement, and 63 (32.0%) had no improvement or deteriorated in health. All patients no matter whether they improved, did not improve, or even became worse rated their health as worse retrospectively. The difference between the then-test rating and the baseline value was similarly sized in all groups. CONCLUSION: More positive ratings of retrospective health are independent of disease change. This suggests that patients do not necessarily change their standards in line with their disease change, and therefore it is inappropriate to use the then-test to correct for such a change. If a then-test is used to correct for shifts in internal standards, it might lead to the paradoxical result that patients who do not improve or even deteriorate increase significantly on self-reported health and pain. An alternative explanation for differences in retrospective and prospective ratings of health is the implicit theory of change which is more successful in explaining our results than prospect theory.1 september 201

Efficacy of a multimodal physiotherapy treatment program for hip osteoarthritis: a randomised placebo-controlled trial protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is a common condition leading to pain, disability and reduced quality of life. There is currently limited evidence to support the use of conservative, non-pharmacological treatments for hip OA. Exercise and manual therapy have both shown promise and are typically used together by physiotherapists to manage painful hip OA. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to compare the efficacy of a physiotherapy treatment program with placebo treatment in reducing pain and improving physical function.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The trial will be conducted at the University of Melbourne Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine. 128 participants with hip pain greater or equal to 40/100 on visual analogue scale (VAS) and evidence of OA on x-ray will be recruited. Treatment will be provided by eight community physiotherapists in the Melbourne metropolitan region. The active physiotherapy treatment will comprise a semi-structured program of manual therapy and exercise plus education and advice. The placebo treatment will consist of sham ultrasound and the application of non-therapeutic gel. The participants and the study assessor will be blinded to the treatment allocation. Primary outcomes will be pain measured by VAS and physical function recorded on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) immediately after the 12 week intervention. Participants will also be followed up at 36 weeks post baseline.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The trial design has important strengths of reproducibility and reflecting contemporary physiotherapy practice. The findings from this randomised trial will provide evidence for the efficacy of a physiotherapy program for painful hip OA.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry reference: ACTRN12610000439044</p

Effects of laterally wedged insoles on symptoms and disease progression in medial knee osteoarthritis: a protocol for a randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Whilst laterally wedged insoles, worn inside the shoes, are advocated as a simple, inexpensive, non-toxic self-administered intervention for knee osteoarthritis (OA), there is currently limited evidence to support their use. The aim of this randomised, double-blind controlled trial is to determine whether laterally wedges insoles lead to greater improvements in knee pain, physical function and health-related quality of life, and slower structural disease progression as well as being more cost-effective, than control flat insoles in people with medial knee OA.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Two hundred participants with painful radiographic medial knee OA and varus malalignment will be recruited from the community and randomly allocated to lateral wedge or control insole groups using concealed allocation. Participants will be blinded as to which insole is considered therapeutic. Blinded follow up assessment will be conducted at 12 months after randomisation. The outcome measures are valid and reliable measures recommended for OA clinical trials. Questionnaires will assess changes in pain, physical function and health-related quality-of-life. Magnetic resonance imaging will measure changes in tibial cartilage volume. To evaluate cost-effectiveness, participants will record the use of all health-related treatments in a log-book returned to the assessor on a monthly basis. To test the effect of the intervention using an intention-to-treat analysis, linear regression modelling will be applied adjusting for baseline outcome values and other demographic characteristics.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Results from this trial will contribute to the evidence regarding the effectiveness of laterally wedged insoles for the management of medial knee OA.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ACTR12605000503628; NCT00415259.</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