Abstract
Objective To investigate firstly the efficacy of three different dosages of one home-based, knee-extensor resistance exercise on knee-extensor strength in patients eligible for knee replacement, and secondly, the influence of exercise on symptoms, physical function and decision on surgery.
Method One-hundred and forty patients eligible for knee replacement were randomized to three groups: 2, 4 or 6 home-based knee-extensor resistance exercise-sessions per week (group 2, 4 and 6 respectively) for 12 weeks. Primary outcome: isometric knee-extensor strength. Secondary outcomes: Oxford Knee Score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, average knee pain last week (0-10 numeric rating scale), 6-minute walk test, stair climbing test, exercise adherence and “need for surgery”.
Results Primary analysis: Intention-to-treat analysis of 140 patients did not find statistically significant differences between the groups from baseline to after 12 weeks of exercise in isometric knee-extensor strength: Group 2 vs. 4 (0.003 Nm/kg (0.2%) [95% CI -0.15 to 0.15], P=0.965) and group 4 vs. 6 (−0.04 Nm/kg (−2.7%) [95% CI -0.15 to 0.12], P=0.628). Secondary analysis: Intention-to-treat analyses showed statistically significant differences between the two and six sessions/week groups in favor of the two sessions/week group for Oxford Knee Score: 4.8 OKS points (15.2%) [1.3 to 8.3], P=0.008) and avg. knee pain last week (NRS 0-10): - 1.3 NRS points (−19.5%) [-2.3 to -0.2], P=0.018. After the 12-week exercise intervention, data were available for 117 patients (N=39/group): 38 (32.5%) patients wanted surgery and 79 (67.5%) postponed surgery. This was independent of exercise dosage.
Conclusion In patients eligible for knee-replacement we found no between-group differences in isometric knee extensor strength after 2, 4 and 6 knee-extensor resistance exercise sessions per week. We saw no indication of an exercise dose-response relationship for isometric knee-extensor strength and only clinically irrelevant within group changes. For some secondary outcome (e.g. KOOS subscales) we found clinically relevant within group changes, which could help explain why only one in three patients decided to have surgery after the simple home-based exercise intervention.
Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02931058. Preprint: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.07.21254965.
Competing Interest Statement
Conflict of Interests, Anders Troelsen: Appointed speaker for Zimmer Biomet. Paid consultant for Zimmer Biomet and Pfizer Denmark. Principal investigator and has received research support from Zimmer Biomet and Pfizer Denmark. Been a member of the board at the European Knee Society (EKS) since 2015.
Clinical Trial
NCT02931058
Clinical Protocols
https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-017-2366-9
Funding Statement
This work was supported by grants from The Capital Regions strategic funds (R142-A5363), The Capital Regions foundation for cross-continuum research (P-2015-1-01, P-2018-1-02, P-2019-1-03), The Danish Rheumatism Association (R156-A4923) and Copenhagen University Hospital Amager-Hvidovres strategic funds (2019-800). The funding sources had no role in this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approvals from the Ethics Committee of the Capital Region, Denmark (H-16025136) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (2012-58-0004) were obtained before the first patient was enrolled.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
E-mail addresses: Anders Troelsen (a_troelsen{at}hotmail.com), Henrik Husted (henrik.husted{at}regionh.dk), Birk Mygind Grønfeldt (birk.mygind.groenfeldt{at}regionh.dk), Kristian Thorborg (kristian.thorborg{at}regionh.dk), Thomas Kallemose (thomas.kallemose{at}regionh.dk), Michael Skovdal Rathleff (misr{at}hst.aau.dk), Thomas Bandholm (thomas.quaade.bandholm{at}regionh.dk)
Section on "trial amendments" has been added.
Data Availability
The raw data is available by contacting the corresponding author Rasmus Skov Husted via email: rasmus.skov.husted{at}regionh.dk
