Exercise adherence in trials of therapeutic exercise interventions for common musculoskeletal conditions: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of the scoping review were to: (1) evaluate how commonly trialists assess and report adherence to exercise intervention for common musculoskeletal conditions and (2) report the levels of adherence to exercise for musculoskeletal conditions and whether this was influenced by variables of interest. METHODS: Medline, Cinahl, Embase, Emcare, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched using predefined terms. Published randomised controlled trials were included. Trials were included if they investigated the effectiveness of an exercise intervention for low back pain, shoulder pain, Achilles tendinopathy and knee osteoarthritis (we selected a priori as indicative common musculoskeletal conditions). Data extraction was performed independently by teams of two reviewers. Descriptive consolidation and qualitative synthesis were performed. RESULTS: 321 trials were included; less than half (46.7%, 150/321) measured adherence. When adherence was assessed, 21% (31/150) of trials did not report the results. Adherence levels were greater when people were supervised. Reporting adherence was more common in registered trials. Adherence was measured most frequently via self-report (47.3%, 71/150) followed by supervised sessions (32.0%, 48/150) or combination of both (20.7%, 31/150). The majority of trials (97.0%, 97/100) reported the level of adherence in terms of a frequency. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of trials investigating exercise interventions for common musculoskeletal conditions do not assess exercise adherence. Trials that were registered reported exercise adherence more frequently. The majority of trials measure adherence via self-report with reliance on only one dimension of exercise adherence (frequency).

Patient knowledge of rotator cuff related shoulder pain condition and treatment and validation of a patient-reported knowledge questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff related shoulder pain (RCRSP) knowledge is an important contributor to compliance with clinical practice guidelines and providing best practice care. However, there are no validated instruments for measuring health literacy levels among people with RCRSP. This study aimed to design a valid and reliable instrument to measure RCRSP health literacy and use it to evaluate an education intervention for people with RCRSP. METHODS: Development of the patient knowledge questionnaire (PKQ-RCRSP) included three phases. Phase 1 was developed based on available literature and input from expert clinicians, researchers and patients. Face validity, pilot testing and readability assessment were also undertaken. In Phase 2, internal consistency and predictive validity were assessed in people with RCRSP and other shoulder pain diagnoses. In Phase 3, RCRSP health literacy was assessed. RESULT: Face validity was acceptable and pilot testing identified minor accuracy issues that were corrected. Literacy level was rated as 'difficult to read' which reflects the medical terminology within the questionnaire. Internal consistency was very good and 81% of questions demonstrated acceptable predictive validity. Health literacy was heterogeneous depending on the question with less than 40% of respondents answering correctly for questions related to the indications, process and the known benefits of RCRSP surgery. CONCLUSION: The PKQ-RCRSP demonstrated acceptable face validity, predictive validity and reliability (internal consistency) in assessing RCRSP health literacy. Health literacy among our small sample was poor for questions related to surgery for RCRSP.

'He explains it in a way that I have confidence he knows what he is doing': A qualitative study of patients' experiences and perspectives of rotator-cuff-related shoulder pain education.

BACKGROUND: Patient education is recommended in clinical practice guidelines for rotator-cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP), yet there are no guidelines for clinicians. A gap in the current literature relates to patients' perspectives. AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the experiences and perspectives of people with RCRSP about education for their condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An inductive qualitative design was adopted. Eight participants with RCRSP participated in individual telephone interviews that were audio-recorded, transcribed and de-identified. Four researchers completed inductive thematic analysis. Institutional ethics approval was obtained. RESULTS: Results are detailed as a thematic analysis from the interview responses. Three primary themes were identified: (1) a therapeutic alliance leads to trust of education; (2) education of RCRSP should be individualized and practical; and (3) delivery of educational interventions should be varied and multi-modal. DISCUSSION: The results demonstrated that trust in the health professional providing the education facilitates adherence and increases belief that the condition is being effectively treated. Participants believed imaging were necessary for an individual diagnosis despite clinical practice guidelines not recommending imaging for the first 6-12 weeks of initial presentation. There was a general caution about generic online information which may adversely impact the value of exclusively online educational intervention in the future. Participants preferred clear and practical education about RCRSP, including activity modification, timeframes for recovery and potential detriments to their recovery. There was consensus that education is best delivered early in the rehabilitation process, however there were mixed preferences for delivery method between written, video and face-to-face which perhaps reflects different learning styles and indicates that a 'one size fits all' approach is not effective in adult education in this condition. CONCLUSION: People with RCRSP believe education about their condition is important and is best delivered by a trusted source early in their rehabilitation. There is a belief that scans are necessary to provide an individualized diagnosis and assists in their understanding of the condition. There is an opportunity for online education; however, this may best be utilised as an adjunct method to face-to-face care.

Internet and Telerehabilitation-Delivered Management of Rotator Cuff-Related Shoulder Pain (INTEL Trial): Randomized Controlled Pilot and Feasibility Trial.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP) is a common and disabling musculoskeletal condition. Internet-based and telerehabilitation delivery of recommended care may improve access to care and improve adherence and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this pilot randomized controlled trial was to assess the feasibility of a 12-week internet-delivered intervention for RCRSP comparing advice only, recommended care, and recommended care with group-based telerehabilitation. METHODS: Reporting was in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist for pilot and feasibility trials. People with a primary complaint of RCRSP for 3 months or longer were identified via a paid Facebook strategy. Screening involved an online questionnaire followed by a 20-minute telehealth assessment. Participants were randomly allocated (via a Zelen design) to receive (1) advice only, (2) recommended care (internet-delivered evidence-based exercise and education), or (3) recommended care and telerehabilitation (including a weekly group teleconference session). Progression criteria for a full-scale trial included (1) recruitment of 20% or greater of eligible participants, (2) acceptable adherence (two or more of the three prescribed weekly sessions) among 70% or greater of participants, (3) 80% or greater retention of participants, (4) absence of intervention-related serious adverse events, and (5) 80% or greater response rates to questionnaires. Secondary clinical and patient knowledge outcomes were collected (via email or text) at baseline, six weeks, and 12 weeks (for clinical and patient knowledge), and within-group change was reported descriptively. RESULTS: We enrolled 36 of 38 (95%) eligible participants and all participants were recruited within a 3-week period. Of the 36 participants, 12 participants were allocated to each of the three trial arms. The mean age of participants was between 51 and 56 years, and 83% (10/12) to 92% (11/12) were female. Retention at the 12-week endpoint was 94% (34/36) and response to email questionnaires at other time points was 83% or greater. We found acceptable adherence (defined as greater than 70% of participants performing exercise 2 or 3 times/week) in the recommended care group with telerehabilitation but not in the recommended care group without telerehabilitation. There was a total of 24 adverse events over 108 person-months of observation. All adverse events were mild or moderate (mainly muscle and shoulder symptoms), with the exception of one instance of elective surgery (unrelated to the person's shoulder condition). CONCLUSIONS: Our prespecified success criteria were met or exceeded, but there was a gender imbalance toward women. It is feasible to progress to a fully powered trial, but strategies to address the gender imbalance need to be implemented. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000248965); https://tinyurl.com/yy6eztf5.