GLA:D® to be Walking Better: Change in Self-Reported Difficulty Walking After Exercise Therapy and Education in Persons with Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Difficulty walking is a primary reason that individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA) seek care. We examined the change in self-reported difficulty walking after participating in the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D®) 8-week education and exercise program and assessed patient factors associated with improvement in difficulty walking. METHODS: This was a registry-based cohort study of individuals with knee OA who enrolled in GLA:D® in Denmark. Assessments were administered at baseline, at program completion (~3 months), and 12 months. Our pre-specified primary outcome was change in self-reported difficulty walking assessed using the EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level walking item. Exposures included sociodemographic factors, measures of OA illness severity, comorbidities, and psychological factors. In those with baseline moderate/severe difficulty walking, using multivariable regression analysis we assessed the relationship between exposures of interest and improvement to no/slight difficulty walking. RESULTS: We included 5,262 participants. Of 2,178 (41.4%) individuals with baseline moderate/severe difficulty walking, 51.4% and 58.3% reported no/slight difficulty walking at 3 and 12 months, respectively. Greater self-efficacy, younger age, female sex, lower BMI, less intense knee pain and better function at baseline were associated with greater likelihood of improvement in difficulty walking; severe difficulty walking at baseline and back pain intensity were associated with decreased likelihood of improvement. CONCLUSION: More than half of those with baseline difficulty walking experienced substantial improvement after completing GLA:D® and this improvement was maintained at 12 months. Several patient factors were associated with the outcome suggesting that some individuals may require additional support and extended treatment.

Benefits and harms of structured outdoor physical activity for people with somatic or mental diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the benefits and harms of structured outdoor physical activity (PA) for people living with one or more somatic or mental diseases. METHODS: We identified articles from inception until Marts 2023 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL and citation tracking in Web of Science. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining structured outdoor PA reporting physical function, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), pain or mental outcomes. We used random-effect meta-analyses and investigated heterogeneity in subgroups, sensitivity and meta-regression analyses. Observational studies and studies with insufficient data were summarized narratively. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE. RESULTS: From 4098 hits, 20 studies (19 RCTs and 1 cohort) were included (n: 1759 participants). Studies varied in type of disease and intervention. End of intervention results suggested a small effect on HRQOL (k = 10, SMD = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.19 to 0.71) and physical function (k = 14, SMD = 0.39, 95%CI: 0.13 to 0.64), while effects were moderate on mental outcomes (k = 13, SMD = -0.52, 95%CI: -0.82 to -0.23) favoring the outdoor intervention over comparators (no intervention, usual care, indoor PA or outdoor intervention without exercise). We were not able to conclude on outdoor interventions' effect on pain. Four studies reported adverse events including non-serious (pain, falls, fatigue) and serious (hospitalization, pneumonia). Certainty of evidence was overall very low. CONCLUSION: Structured outdoor PA may improve HRQOL and physical function, as well as mental health outcomes. The very low certainty of evidence calls for high quality RCTs to determine benefits and harms of structured outdoor PA.

Childhood and adolescence physical activity and multimorbidity later in life: A systematic review.

Background: No systematic summary exists on childhood physical activity and later-life multimorbidity risks. We primarily investigated the association of physical activity in childhood and adolescence and the development of multimorbidity in adulthood. Secondarily, we examined whether physical activity level differ in children and adolescents with and without multimorbidity and whether there is a cross-sectional association between physical activity and multimorbidity. Methods: Following Cochrane Handbook guidelines and adhering to PRISMA recommendations, we included cross-sectional, case-control and longitudinal studies that investigated the association between physical activity in children and adolescents and development of multimorbidity. Results were summarized narratively and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42023407063. Results: Of 9064 studies identified, 11 were included in 13 papers. Longitudinals studies suggested that being physically active in childhood and adolescence was associated with a lower risk of multimorbidity in adulthood. Three out of five studies reported lower physical activity level in children and adolescents with multimorbidity compared to those without, and two did not find a between-group difference. Cross-sectional evidence on the association between multimorbidity and lower physical activity was uncertain. Overall, the evidence certainty for all outcomes was considered low due to the indirectness and inconsistency in findings. Conclusions: Childhood and adolescence physical activity appeared to be linked with a reduced risk of later-life multimorbidity but the certainty of the evidence is low. These results support the promotion of physical activity during childhood and adolescence.

Mapping interventional components and behavior change techniques used to promote self-management in people with multimorbidity: a scoping review.

Ageing populations and improved survival, have contributed to a rise in the number of people living with multimorbidity, raising issues related to polypharmacy, treatment burden, competing priorities and poor coordination of care. Self-management programs are increasingly included as an essential component of interventions to improve outcomes in this population. However, an overview of how interventions supporting self-management in patients with multimorbidity is missing. This scoping review focused on mapping the literature on patient-centered interventions for people living with multimorbidity. We searched several databases, clinical registries, and grey literature for RCTs published between 1990-2019 describing interventions that supported self-management in people with multimorbidity. We included 72 studies that were found to be very heterogeneous when it comes to the population, delivery modes and modalities, intervention elements and facilitators. The results pointed to an extensive use of cognitive behavioral therapy as a basis for interventions, as well as behavior change theories and disease management frameworks. The most coded behavior change techniques stemmed from the categories Social Support, Feedback and monitoring and Goals and Planning. To allow for implementation of effective interventions in clinical practice, improved reporting of intervention mechanisms in RCTs is warranted.

Tailoring CONSORT-SPI to improve the reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials: An expert consensus study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Inadequate reporting of smoking cessation intervention trials is common and leads to significant challenges for researchers. The aim of this study was to tailor CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)-SPI (Social and Psychological Interventions) guidelines to improve reporting of trials of behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation. METHOD: Informed by missing data from the IC-SMOKE (Intervention and Comparison group support provided in SMOKing cEssation) systematic review project, this study used a multi-stage Delphi process to examine which items could be added or modified to improve the reporting of smoking cessation trials. The first stage involved an on-line survey of 17 international experts in smoking cessation and trial methodology voting on the importance of items for inclusion in the updated guidelines. This was followed by a face-to-face expert consensus meeting attended by 15 of these experts, where the final inclusion and exclusion of new items and modifications were agreed upon. A nine-point Likert scale was used to establish consensus, with suggested modifications requiring agreement of 75% or more. Disagreements in the first stage were presented again at the second stage for discussion and a second round of voting. Only items which reached the threshold for agreement were included. RESULTS: The experts agreed on the inclusion of 10 new items and the specification of 12 existing items. This included modifications that could apply to trials more widely (e.g. the rationale for the comparator), but also modifications that were very specific to smoking cessation trials (e.g. the reporting of smoking cessation outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: A Delphi study has developed a modified CONSORT-SPI guideline (CONSORT-SPI-SMOKE) to improve the reporting of trials of behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation.

Physical activity and exercise therapy for people with multimorbidity.

Physical activity and exercise therapy appear safe and beneficial for people with multimorbidity and should therefore be considered in the prevention and management of multimorbidity, as argued in this review. General practitioners and specialists should refer people with multimorbidity to supervised exercise therapy (2-3 times/week for 8-12 weeks, strengthening or aerobic exercise or a combination), while encouraging and educating patients to improve physical activity to improve overall health by e.g., integrating physical activity in everyday-life practices such as gardening, transportation, and house chores.

Exercise-based rehabilitation in and with nature: a scoping review mapping available interventions.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise is an effective component in rehabilitation of a range of chronic conditions. There is a growing interest in the use of exercise-based nature interacted rehabilitation (EBNIR), but an overview of current evidence is missing. The objective of this scoping review was to map existing exercise-based rehabilitation interventions conducted with incidental or intentional nature interaction focusing on its populations, types of outcomes, and theoretical rationale for people with physical and mental disabilities. METHODS: This scoping review identified peer-reviewed publications, registered upcoming trials and grey literature. To map all available knowledge, a comprehensive search of selected databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Cochrane; Web of Science; Pedro) from inception to October 2022. Data were synthesized in a thematic presentation guided by TIDieR, supplemented by a checklist developed for this study accounting nature incidental or intentional interaction. RESULTS: Twelve studies including 856 participants met the inclusion criteria. Eleven were completed trials and one was registered in clinicaltrials.gov to be run in 2023. A total of 856 patients were enrolled in the 12 studies (range 18-262, median 50). The included studies had great variation. The incidental or intentional interacted exercise-based interventions consisted of outdoor walks, neck exercises and surfing interventions in patients with physical or mental health conditions. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review presents an overview of limited and diverse evidence within the field of EBNIR, in patients with physical or mental health conditions. Our review provides an overview that will be helpful in the design of future EBNIR trials.

Benefits and Harms of Digital Health Interventions Promoting Physical Activity in People With Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions for managing chronic conditions have great potential. However, the benefits and harms are still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of digital health interventions in promoting physical activity in people with chronic conditions. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to October 2022. Eligible randomized controlled trials were included if they used a digital component in physical activity promotion in adults with ≥1 of the following conditions: depression or anxiety, ischemic heart disease or heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, knee or hip osteoarthritis, hypertension, or type 2 diabetes. The primary outcomes were objectively measured physical activity and physical function (eg, walk or step tests). We used a random effects model (restricted maximum likelihood) for meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses to assess the impact of study-level covariates. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: Of 14,078 hits, 130 randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with usual care or minimal intervention, digital health interventions increased objectively measured physical activity (end of intervention: standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.37; follow-up: SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.31) and physical function (end of intervention: SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-0.59; follow-up: SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.01-0.57). The secondary outcomes also favored the digital health interventions for subjectively measured physical activity and physical function, depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life at the end of the intervention but only subjectively measured physical activity at follow-up. The risk of nonserious adverse events, but not serious adverse events, was higher in the digital health interventions at the end of the intervention, but no difference was seen at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Digital health interventions improved physical activity and physical function across various chronic conditions. Effects on depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life were only observed at the end of the intervention. The risk of nonserious adverse events is present during the intervention, which should be addressed. Future studies should focus on better reporting, comparing the effects of different digital health solutions, and investigating how intervention effects are sustained beyond the end of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020189028; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189028.

Exercise Therapy for Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis: Is There An Ideal Prescription?

Purpose of review: Exercise therapy is the first line treatment for patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) but is consistently underutilized. In this review, we aim to provide health care professionals with an overview of the latest evidence in the areas of exercise therapy for OA, which can serve as a guide for incorporating the ideal exercise therapy prescription in the overall management plan for their patients with OA. Recent findings: Evidence continues to be produced supporting the use of exercise therapy for all patients with knee or hip OA. Ample evidence exists suggesting exercise therapy is a safe form of treatment, for both joint structures and the patient overall. Several systematic reviews show that exercise therapy is likely to improve patient outcomes, regardless of disease severity or comorbidities. However, no single type of exercise therapy is superior to others. Summary: Health care practitioners and patients should be encouraged to incorporate exercise therapy into treatment plans and can be assured of the safety profile and likelihood of improvement in important patient outcomes. Since no single exercise therapy program shows vastly superior benefit, patient preference and contextual factors should be central to the shared decision-making process when selecting and individualising appropriate exercise therapy prescriptions.

Estimating the true effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions under variable comparator conditions: A systematic review and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Behavioural smoking cessation trials have used comparators that vary considerably between trials. Although some previous meta-analyses made attempts to account for variability in comparators, these relied on subsets of trials and incomplete data on comparators. This study aimed to estimate the relative effectiveness of (individual) smoking cessation interventions while accounting for variability in comparators using comprehensive data on experimental and comparator interventions. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-regression was conducted including 172 randomised controlled trials with at least 6 months follow-up and biochemically verified smoking cessation. Authors were contacted to obtain unpublished information. This information was coded in terms of active content and attributes of the study population and methods. Meta-regression was used to create a model predicting smoking cessation outcomes. This model was used to re-estimate intervention effects, as if all interventions have been evaluated against the same comparators. Outcome measures included log odds of smoking cessation for the meta-regression models and smoking cessation differences and ratios to compare relative effectiveness. RESULTS: The meta-regression model predicted smoking cessation rates well (pseudo R2 = 0.44). Standardising the comparator had substantial impact on conclusions regarding the (relative) effectiveness of trials and types of intervention. Compared with a 'no support comparator', self-help was 1.33 times (95% CI = 1.16-1.49), brief physician advice 1.61 times (95% CI = 1.31-1.90), nurse individual counselling 1.76 times (95% CI = 1.62-1.90), psychologist individual counselling 2.04 times (95% CI = 1.95-2.15) and group psychologist interventions 2.06 times (95% CI = 1.92-2.20) more effective. Notably, more elaborate experimental interventions (e.g. psychologist counselling) were typically compared with more elaborate comparators, masking their effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Comparator variability and underreporting of comparators obscures the interpretation, comparison and generalisability of behavioural smoking cessation trials. Comparator variability should, therefore, be taken into account when interpreting and synthesising evidence from trials. Otherwise, policymakers, practitioners and researchers may draw incorrect conclusions about the (cost) effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions and their constituent components.

The Effects of Different Management Strategies or Rehabilitation Approaches on Knee Joint Structural and Molecular Biomarkers Following Traumatic Knee Injury: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials for the OPTIKNEE Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the effectiveness of management strategies and rehabilitation approaches for knee joint structural and molecular biomarker outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscal tear. DESIGN: Intervention systematic review. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and SPORTDiscus databases from their inception up to November 3, 2021. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of management strategies or rehabilitation approaches for structural/molecular biomarkers of knee joint health following ACL and/or meniscal tear. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 5 RCTs (9 papers) with primary ACL tear (n = 365). Two RCTs compared initial management strategies (rehabilitation plus early vs optional delayed ACL surgery), reporting on structural biomarkers (radiographic osteoarthritis, cartilage thickness, meniscal damage) in 5 papers and molecular biomarkers (inflammation, cartilage turnover) in 1 paper. Three RCTs compared different post-ACL reconstruction (ACLR) rehabilitation approaches (high vs low intensity plyometric exercises, accelerated vs nonaccelerated rehabilitation, continuous passive vs active motion), reporting on structural biomarkers (joint space narrowing) in 1 paper and molecular biomarkers (inflammation, cartilage turnover) in 2 papers. RESULTS: There were no differences in structural or molecular biomarkers between post-ACLR rehabilitation approaches. One RCT comparing initial management strategies demonstrated that rehabilitation plus early ACLR was associated with greater patellofemoral cartilage thinning, elevated inflammatory cytokine response, and reduced incidence of medial meniscal damage over 5 years compared to rehabilitation with no/delayed ACLR. CONCLUSION: Very low-certainty evidence suggests that different initial management strategies (rehabilitation plus early vs optional delayed ACL surgery) but not postoperative rehabilitation approaches may influence the incidence of meniscal damage, patellofemoral cartilage loss and cytokine concentrations over 5 years post-ACL tear. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(4):1-22. Epub: 20 February 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11576.

Study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial of personalized exercise therapy and self-management support for people with multimorbidity: The MOBILIZE study.

Background: Despite the great individual and societal burden associated with multimorbidity, little is known about how to effectively manage it. Objective: The aim of this multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to investigate the 12-month effects of a personalized exercise therapy and self-management support program in addition to usual care in people with multimorbidity. Design: This is a protocol for a pragmatic, parallel-group (1:1 ratio), superiority RCT conducted at five intervention sites (two hospitals, a private practice physiotherapy clinic and two municipal rehabilitation centers) in Region Zealand, Denmark. A total of 228 persons with multimorbidity aged 18 years or older, will be randomly allocated to one of two groups. Both groups will receive usual care, defined as routine care for multimorbidity at the discretion of the treating doctor, while the intervention group will also participate in a 12-week exercise therapy and self-management support program tailored to people with multimorbidity at one of the intervention sites. The primary outcome will be the between-group difference in change in EQ-5D-5L from baseline to the follow-up at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include objectively-measured physical function and physical activity, inflammatory markers, disease and treatment burden, anxiety, depression, stress, sleep, pain and other self-reported parameters. In parallel with the RCT, an observational cohort will follow persons aged ≥18 years with multimorbidity not adhering to all eligibility criteria, as well as people fulfilling all eligibility criteria, but unwilling to participate in the RCT. This study was approved by the Regional Committee on Health Research Ethics for Region Zealand (SJ-857) and results will be communicated in scientific papers, at relevant conferences and to a broader audience. Discussion: Exercise therapy and self-management support is safe and effective in people with single conditions. However, it is still unclear whether this holds true for individuals with multimorbidity. This pragmatic, multicenter RCT will provide high-quality evidence on the benefits and harms of exercise therapy and self-management support and, if the results support it, lead to the development of a plan for implementation in clinical practice.

Personalised exercise therapy and self-management support for people with multimorbidity: feasibility of the MOBILIZE intervention.

BACKGROUND: Exercise therapy is safe and effective in people with single conditions, but the feasibility in people with two or more conditions is unclear. Therefore, the aim was to evaluate the feasibility of exercise therapy and self-management in people with multimorbidity prior to a randomised, controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: This was a mixed-methods feasibility study performed in two general hospitals and one psychiatric hospital. 20 adult patients (8 females; mean age (SD) 67 (6.9)) with at least two long-term conditions and a score of ≥ 3 on Disease Burden Impact Scale for at least one condition (at least moderate limitations of daily activities) and of ≥ 2 for at least one other condition. Patients with unstable health conditions, at risk of serious adverse events (SAE) or with terminal conditions were excluded. Participants received 12 weeks of exercise (18 60-min group-based and 6 home-based sessions) and self-management support (6 90-min group-based sessions) supervised by physiotherapists. Pre-defined progression to RCT criteria were the primary outcomes and included recruitment rate (acceptable 20 participants in 3 months), retention through follow-up (75% retention), compliance (75% complete > 9 of exercise and > 3 self-management sessions), outcome burden (80% do not find outcomes too burdensome), improvement in quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and function (6-min walk test; ≥ 50% experience clinically relevant improvements) and intervention-related SAEs (No SAEs). Furthermore, a purposeful sample including eleven participants and two facilitators were interviewed about their experiences of participating/facilitating. Qualitative data was analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Recruitment rate (20 in 49 days), retention (85%), outcome burden (95%), and SAEs (0 related to intervention) were acceptable, while compliance (70%) and improvements (35% in quality of life, 46% in function) were not (amendment needed before proceeding to RCT). The intervention was found acceptable by both participants and physiotherapists with some barriers among participants relating to managing multiple chronic conditions while caring for others or maintaining a job. Physiotherapists expressed a need for additional training. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise therapy and self-management are feasible in people with multimorbidity. The subsequent RCT, amending the intervention according to progression criteria and feedback, will determine whether the intervention is superior to usual care alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04645732 Open Science Framework https://osf.io/qk6yg/.

Effect of In-Person Delivered Behavioural Interventions in People with Multimorbidity: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the effect of in-person delivered behavioural interventions in people with multimorbidity and which behaviour change techniques (BCTs), targeting lifestyle behaviours, are associated with better outcomes. METHODS: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL and screened reference list of reviews including people with multimorbidity, registries, and citation tracking of included studies. Meta-analyses using random-effects model to assess the effect of behavioural interventions and meta-regression analyses and effectiveness ratios to investigate the impact of mediators on effect estimates. Cochrane 'Risk of Bias Tool' 2.0 and the GRADE assessment to evaluate the overall quality of evidence. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 1,378 people. Behavioural interventions had little to no effect on physical activity (standardised mean difference 0.38, 95% CI -0.12-0.87) and the effect on weight loss was uncertain (BMI mean difference -0.17, 95% CI -1.1-0.83) at the end-treatment follow-up. Small improvements were seen in health-related quality of life (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.17-0.42) and physical function (SMD 0.42, 95% CI 0.12-0.73), and moderate improvements were seen for depression symptoms (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -0.97-0.42). Studies using the BCTs 'action planning' and 'social support (practical)' reported greater physical activity and weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural interventions targeting lifestyle behaviours may improve health-related quality of life and physical function, and reduce depression, whereas little to no effect was achieved on physical activity and weight loss in people with multimorbidity. However, the evidence for physical activity and weight loss were of low quality and the end-treatment benefits diminished over time.

Variability in effect sizes of exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis depending on comparator interventions.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis (OA) have largely ignored the variability in comparator interventions. OBJECTIVE: To assess how effect estimates of exercise therapy for knee OA as reported in randomized controlled trials vary depending on the comparator interventions. METHODS: We followed the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA guidance to conduct and report this meta-epidemiological study. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from systematic reviews published in 2015 or later and reference lists of included studies. Exercise therapy RCTs testing interventions that adhered to the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines compared to any comparator intervention in people with knee OA and reporting outcomes of knee pain, physical function and/or quadriceps strength at the end of intervention were included. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs with 2412 participants were included. Comparator interventions included no intervention, non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy, education/self-management, and passive modalities. For pain, standardized mean difference (SMD) for ACSM compliant exercise therapy compared to passive modalities was 1.76 (95% CI 0.49, 3.04), no intervention 0.93 (95% CI 0.50; 1.36), education/self-management 0.27 (95% CI 0.07, 0.47), and non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy 0.09 (95% CI -0.06, 0.23). For physical function, SMD for ACSM compliant exercise therapy compared to passive modalities was 1.29 (95% CI 0.41, 2.17), no intervention 0.76 (95% CI 0.15, 1.36), non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy 0.25 (95% CI -0.00, 0.51) and education/self-management 0.21 (95% CI -0.14, 0.55). For quadriceps strength, SMD for ACSM compliant exercise therapy compared to no intervention was 0.69 (95% CI 0.42, 0.96), non-ACSM compliant exercise therapy 0.23 (95% CI -0.01, 0.46), education/self-management -0.02 (95% CI -0.45, 0.42) and passive modalities 0.80 (95% CI -0.10, 1.71). CONCLUSION: The effect of exercise therapy for knee OA varies significantly depending on the comparator intervention. This variability should be assessed routinely in systematic reviews.

Personalised exercise therapy and self-management support for people with multimorbidity: Development of the MOBILIZE intervention.

BACKGROUND: To our knowledge, there is no intervention which includes personalised exercise therapy and self-management support for people with multimorbidity, although these interventions may be as effective as for people with single chronic conditions. Therefore, we developed a novel intervention, including personalised exercise therapy and self-management support for people with multimorbidity. METHODS: We followed the Medical Research Council framework and conducted one scoping review, five systematic reviews, two registry-based studies, one qualitative interview study and a mixed-methods feasibility study. Following an iterative approach, together with feedback from people with multimorbidity and relevant stakeholders, we developed the MOBILIZE intervention. RESULTS: The intervention included 24 (60 minutes) sessions of personalised exercise therapy and 24 (30 minutes) sessions of self-management support twice a week for 12 weeks, delivered in small groups by specifically trained physiotherapists. The intervention targets physiological, psychosocial, behavioural, and contextual factors to improve health-related quality of life and physical function in people living with multimorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a personalised exercise therapy and self-management support programme for people with multimorbidity. The intervention will be tested for its safety and effectiveness in a randomised controlled trial.

OPTIKNEE 2022: consensus recommendations to optimise knee health after traumatic knee injury to prevent osteoarthritis.

The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA.

Objectively measured physical activity levels and adherence to physical activity guidelines in people with multimorbidity-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine levels of objectively measured physical activity (PA) and the proportion of adults with multimorbidity that adheres to PA guidelines. METHODS: All studies, where PA was measured at baseline using an activity monitor in an adult (≥18 years) multimorbid (≥80% of the population had ≥2 chronic conditions) population. A systematic literature search was performed in Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, opengrey.eu and google.com from inception up until 18th of January 2022. Risk of bias was assessed with a modified version of the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. A random-effects meta-analyses was performed to estimate daily minutes of sedentary behavior (SB), light PA (LPA), moderate PA (MPA), moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) and steps. Proportions adhering to PA guidelines was narratively synthesized. Certainty of evidence was determined using The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (2,172 participants) were included. The most frequent combination of conditions were type 2 diabetes and hypertension (six studies). Participants spent a daily average of 500.5 (95% CI: 407.1 to 593.9) minutes in SB, 325.6 (95% CI: 246.4 to 404.7 minutes in LPA and 32.7 (95% CI: 20.2 to 45.3) minutes in MVPA. The mean daily number of steps was 5,145 (95% CI: 4264 to 6026) for people in free-living conditions. The proportion adhering to PA guidelines ranged widely (7.4% to 43%). All studies were rated as at high risk of bias and the certainty of evidence was very low. CONCLUSIONS: PA levels and adherence varied from low to above guideline recommended levels for adults with chronic conditions, depending on PA intensity. The very low certainty of evidence calls for high quality studies focusing on detailed descriptions of PA behavior in people with multimorbidity. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172456.

Prevalence, frequency, adverse events, and reasons for analgesic use in youth athletes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 44,381 athletes.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the prevalence, frequency, adverse effects, and reasons for analgesic use in youth athletes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Systematic searches in Embase, Medline, and SPORT-Discus from inception to September 2021, screening of reference lists, and citation tracking were performed to identify observational studies including athletes aged 15-24 years and reporting data on prevalence and/or frequency of analgesic use. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effect proportion meta-analyses, stratified by type of analgesic medication and prevalence measure, estimated the prevalence of analgesic use. Data on usage frequency, adverse events, and reasons for analgesic use was synthesized narratively. RESULTS: Forty-nine studies were included (44,381 athletes), of which 19 were good/high quality. Seven categories of analgesics were identified across 10 prevalence time-points. Meta-analyses suggested common use of NSAIDs (point prevalence 48 % [95 % CI 23 % to 73 %], in-season prevalence 92 % [95 % CI 88 % to 95 %]). The lowest prevalence was found for use of local anesthetic injections within the previous 12 months (2 % [95 % CI 1 % to 3 %]). Seven to 50 % of athletes reported weekly analgesics use. The proportion of adverse events ranged from 3.3 % to 19.2 %. Reasons for using analgesics included treatment of sports-related pain or injury, to treat illness, and to enhance performance. CONCLUSIONS: Analgesics are commonly used in youth athletes, but estimates vary depending on type of analgesic and prevalence measure. As the majority of studies were of poor methodological quality, future high-quality research should include prospective data collection of analgesic use to understand consumption trajectories.