Improving rehabilitation for patients with chronic knee pain

ISRCTN ISRCTN63848242
DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN63848242
Secondary identifying numbers PRF/03/03
Submission date
06/11/2006
Registration date
30/04/2007
Last edited
11/10/2011
Recruitment status
No longer recruiting
Overall study status
Completed
Condition category
Musculoskeletal Diseases
Prospectively registered
Protocol
Statistical analysis plan
Results
Individual participant data

Plain English Summary

Not provided at time of registration

Contact information

Ms Sally Jessep
Scientific

Physiotherapy Department
Sevenoaks Hospital
Hospital Road
Sevenoaks
TN13 3PG
United Kingdom

Study information

Study designThe trial is a pragmatic, randomised, single blind study and a pilot for a potentially larger project.
Primary study designInterventional
Secondary study designRandomised controlled trial
Study setting(s)Other
Study typeQuality of life
Scientific title
Study acronym7OAKS-ESCAPE
Study hypothesis1. For patients with chronic knee pain a rehabilitation regimen delivered in the community with regular follow-up reduces pain and disability better than routine physiotherapy and these benefits are maintained over time
2. The rehabilitation regimen reduces healthcare utilisation and is ultimately less costly than routine physiotherapy
Ethics approval(s)The study was approved by the Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells Local Ethics Committee on the 18th December 2003 (ref: 149/9/03).
ConditionChronic knee pain, osteoarthritis
InterventionInterventions:
Group one: Innovative exercise and education programme - this is a course of ten sessions each consisting of some education and some exercise
Group two: Routine physiotherapy

Outcome evaluation:
Outcome measures at baseline and at 12-month follow-up assessment will be summarised using appropriate descriptive statistics. Primary analyses will be by intention-to treat. The level of significance will be set at p<0.05. The effect of the intervention on the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritic Index (WOMAC) functional score will be assessed, first, by investigating whether outcomes differ significantly overall by groups.

These analyses will be adjusted for baseline measures. The following additional analyses are planned. Two tests of interaction will be carried out to investigate whether the effect intervention is influenced by:
1. Depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression [HAD] score), or
2. Self-efficacy (Arthritis Self-Efficacy Score)

For all outcomes, both unadjusted (adjusting only for the baseline measure) and adjusted analyses (adjusting for other potential confounding factors) will be carried out; the latter will be interpreted as 'sensitivity analyses' to explore the robustness of the unadjusted analyses to possible confounding. Finally, process variables characterising the success with which the intervention was delivered (e.g. compliance) will be included in analyses of WOMAC functional score only, in order to interpret better the overall effects of the intervention.

Economic evaluation:
The primary economic evaluation will be a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing changes in the primary outcome (WOMAC) and total societal costs for each group. The secondary economic evaluation will be a cost-utility analysis based on utility weights associated with EuroQoL Health Survey (EQ-5D) health states. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will be employed for both the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses in order to better inform decisions about the relative cost-effectiveness of the three treatments. Supplementary evaluation will take the form of a cost-consequences analysis, examining total and component costs alongside all outcomes.

The data analyses would be conducted in a manner consistent with those employed in the clinical evaluation (for example, on an intention-to-treat basis, and adopting the same conventions with respect to cluster randomisation, missing items scores, missing observations etc.). Cost differences between groups will be tested using the student's t-test. Cost data are often skewed, violating the normality assumption underpinning the validity of the t-test. If this is the case, bootstrap replications of the original data will be performed to check the robustness of the t-test results. Sensitivity analyses will be performed to check the assumptions made in the cost calculations and analyses. In addition, the EuroQoL will enable calculation of cost per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) for the interventions.
Intervention typeOther
Primary outcome measureWestern Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritic Index (WOMAC) functional score at 12 months.
Secondary outcome measures1. Aggregate Functional Performance Test (AFPT)
2. Health-related quality of life using the Euroquol
3. Exercise self-efficacy
4. Depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale
Overall study start date01/03/2004
Overall study end date01/03/2007

Eligibility

Participant type(s)Patient
Age groupAdult
SexNot Specified
Target number of participants60
Participant inclusion criteria1. Over 50 years of age
2. Presented to their General Practitioner with chronic knee pain
Participant exclusion criteria1. Unstable, co-existing medical or psychological conditions
2. Those treated with physiotherapy to the knee in the previous 12 months
3. Those receiving an intra-articular injection to the knee in the previous six months
4. Other joint pain that would prevent them participating in an exercise programme
5. Taking steroids
6. Wheelchair bound
7. A poor command of English
Recruitment start date01/03/2004
Recruitment end date01/03/2007

Locations

Countries of recruitment

  • England
  • United Kingdom

Study participating centre

Physiotherapy Department
Sevenoaks
TN13 3PG
United Kingdom

Sponsor information

Physiotherapy Research Foundation (UK)
Research organisation

Chartered Society of Physiotherapy
14 Bedford Row
London
WC1R 4ED
United Kingdom

Website http://www.csp.org.uk
ROR logo "ROR" https://ror.org/04sn78z72

Funders

Funder type

Research organisation

Physiotherapy Research Foundation (UK) (ref. PRF/03/3)

No information available

Results and Publications

Intention to publish date
Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to shareNo
IPD sharing plan summaryNot provided at time of registration
Publication and dissemination planNot provided at time of registration
IPD sharing plan

Study outputs

Output type Details Date created Date added Peer reviewed? Patient-facing?
Results article results 01/06/2009 Yes No