ABSTRACT
Objective: To examine changes in physical activity, sleep, pain and mood in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic by leveraging an ongoing randomized clinical trial (RCT). Methods: Participants enrolled in a 12-month parallel two-arm RCT (NCT03064139) interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic wore an activity monitor (Fitbit Charge 3) and filled out custom weekly surveys rating knee pain, mood, and sleep as part of the study. Data from 30 weeks of the parent study were used for this analysis. Daily step count and sleep duration were extracted from activity monitor data, and participants self-reported knee pain, positive mood, and negative mood via surveys. Metrics were averaged within each participant and then across all participants for pre-pandemic, stay-at-home, and reopening periods, reflecting the phased re-opening in the state of Massachusetts. Results: Data from 28 participants showed small changes with inconclusive clinical significance during the stay-at-home and reopening periods compared to pre-pandemic for all outcomes. Summary statistics suggested substantial variability across participants with some participants showing persistent declines in physical activity during the observation period. Conclusion: Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical activity, sleep, pain, and mood were variable across individuals with OA. Specific reasons for this variability could not be determined. Identifying factors that could affect individuals with knee OA who may exhibit reduced physical activity and/or worse symptoms during major lifestyle changes (such as the ongoing pandemic) is important for providing targeted healthcare services and management advice towards those that could benefit from it the most.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Measuring and modifying movement-related joint loading is integral to the management of lower extremity osteoarthritis (OA). Although traditional approaches rely on measurements made within the laboratory or clinical environments, inertial sensors provide an opportunity to quantify these outcomes in patients' natural environments, providing greater ecological validity and opportunities to develop large data sets of movement data for the development of OA interventions. OBJECTIVE: This narrative review aimed to discuss and summarize recent developments in the use of inertial sensors for assessing movement during daily activities in individuals with hip and knee OA and to identify how this may translate to improved remote health care for this population. METHODS: A literature search was performed in November 2018 and repeated in July 2019 and March 2021 using the PubMed and Embase databases for publications on inertial sensors in hip and knee OA published in English within the previous 5 years. The search terms encompassed both OA and wearable sensors. Duplicate studies, systematic reviews, conference abstracts, and study protocols were also excluded. One reviewer screened the search result titles by removing irrelevant studies, and 2 reviewers screened study abstracts to identify studies using inertial sensors as the main sensing technology and a primary outcome related to movement quality. In addition, after the March 2021 search, 2 reviewers rescreened all previously included studies to confirm their relevance to this review. RESULTS: From the search process, 43 studies were determined to be relevant and subsequently included in this review. Inertial sensors have been successfully implemented for assessing the presence and severity of OA (n=11), assessing disease progression risk and providing feedback for gait retraining (n=7), and remotely monitoring intervention outcomes and identifying potential responders and nonresponders to interventions (n=14). In addition, studies have validated the use of inertial sensors for these applications (n=8) and analyzed the optimal sensor placement combinations and data input analysis for measuring different metrics of interest (n=3). These studies show promise for remote health care monitoring and intervention delivery in hip and knee OA, but many studies have focused on walking rather than a range of activities of daily living and have been performed in small samples (<100 participants) and in a laboratory rather than in a real-world environment. CONCLUSIONS: Inertial sensors show promise for remote monitoring, risk assessment, and intervention delivery in individuals with hip and knee OA. Future opportunities remain to validate these sensors in real-world settings across a range of activities of daily living and to optimize sensor placement and data analysis approaches.