Ultrasound measures of muscle thickness may be superior to strength testing in adults with knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional study

Abstract Background Evaluation of muscle strength as performed routinely with a dynamometer may be limited by important factors such as pain during muscle contraction. Few studies have compared formal strength testing with ultrasound to measure muscle bulk in adults with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods We investigated the muscle bulk of lower limb muscles in adults with knee OA using quantitative ultrasound. We analyzed the relationship between patient reported function and the muscle bulk of hip adductors, hip abductors, knee extensors and ankle plantarflexors. We further correlated muscle bulk measures with joint torques calculated with a hand held dynamometer. We hypothesized that ultrasound muscle bulk would have high levels of interrater reliability and correlate more strongly with pain and function than strength measured by a dynamometer. 23 subjects with unilateral symptomatic knee OA completed baseline questionnaires including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Lower Extremity Activity Scale. Joint torque was measured with a dynamometer and muscle bulk was assessed with ultrasound. Results Higher ultrasound measured muscle bulk was correlated with less pain in all muscle groups. When comparing muscle bulk and torque measures, ultrasound-measured muscle bulk of the quadriceps was more strongly correlated with measures of pain and function than quadriceps isometric strength measured with a dynamometer. Conclusions Ultrasound is a feasible method to assess muscle bulk of lower limb muscles in adults with knee OA, with high levels of interrater reliability, and correlates negatively with patient reported function. Compared with use of a hand held dynamometer to measure muscle function, ultrasound may be a superior modality

Timing of physical therapy initiation for nonsurgical management of musculoskeletal disorders and effects on patient outcomes: a systematic review

Study Design: Systematic review. Background: Current US practice guidelines suggest an initial wait-and-see approach following onset of musculoskeletal pain, particularly for spinal pain. Several studies suggest that early, compared with delayed, initiation of physical therapy for musculoskeletal conditions may decrease health costs and improve outcomes. Objective: To compare early and delayed initiation of physical therapy for individuals with musculoskeletal conditions and to assess effects on patient-important outcomes and cost. Methods: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, and PEDro were the data sources. We included studies that compared early and delayed initiation of physical therapy for patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Studies in which early and delayed interventions differed were excluded. Two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics and outcomes, and determined eligibility and quality through consensus with a third reviewer. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used in summary conclusions. Standardized effect sizes (d) and odds ratios were calculated to assess the effect strength of early versus delayed physical therapy for each included study. Results: Of the 3855 articles initially screened, 14 studies were included. The majority of articles studied low back pain (only 2 articles studied cervical pain). For spinal pain, there was low-quality evidence that early versus delayed physical therapy was associated with decreased cost and decreased frequency of opioid prescriptions, advanced imaging, and surgeries without compromising patient-important outcomes. One subgroup analyzed showed improved function/disability with early physical therapy in an occupational health setting. Conclusion: Although there were consistent results across studies favoring early physical therapy for decreased cost and medical utilization, quality was limited. Preliminary evidence suggests that early physical therapy may decrease cost without compromising outcomes. The primary limitation of the current research on this topic is in study design. Additional high-quality research involving prospective randomized designs and economic impact analyses is required to further investigate the outcomes associated with early initiation of physical therapy. Level Of Evidence: Therapy, level 1a

Subsequent health-care utilization associated with early physical therapy for new episodes of low back pain in older adults

BACKGROUND: The association between early physical therapy (PT) and subsequent health-care utilization following a new visit for low back pain is not clear, particularly in the setting of acute low back pain. PURPOSE: This study aimed to estimate the association between initiating early PT following a new visit for an episode of low back pain and subsequent back pain-specific health-care utilization in older adults. DESIGN/SETTING: This is a prospective cohort study. Data were collected at three integrated health-care systems in the United States through the Back Pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD) registry. PATIENT SAMPLE: We recruited 4,723 adults, aged 65 and older, presenting to a primary care setting with a new episode of low back pain. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was total back pain-specific relative value units (RVUs), from days 29 to 365. Secondary outcomes included overall RVUs for all health care and use of specific health-care services including imaging (x-ray and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] or computed tomography [CT]), emergency department visits, physician visits, PT, spinal injections, spinal surgeries, and opioid use. METHODS: We compared patients who had early PT (initiated within 28 days of the index visit) with those not initiating early PT using appropriate, generalized linear models to adjust for potential confounding variables. RESULTS: Adjusted analysis found no statistically significant difference in total spine RVUs between the two groups (ratio of means 1.19, 95% CI of 0.72-1.96, p=.49). For secondary outcomes, only the difference between total spine imaging RVUs and total PT RVUs was statistically significant. The early PT group had greater PT RVUs; the ratio of means was 2.56 (95% CI of 2.17-3.03, p\u3c.001). The early PT group had greater imaging RVUs; the ratio of means was 1.37 (95% CI of 1.09-1.71, p=.01.) CONCLUSIONS: We found that in a group of older adults presenting for a new episode of low back pain, the use of early PT is not associated with any statistically significant difference in subsequent back pain-specific health-care utilization compared with patients not receiving early PT