Does physical activity change following hip and knee replacement? Matched case-control study evaluating Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether physical activity measured using the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE), changes during the initial 24 months post-total hip (THR) or knee replacement (TKR), and how this compares to a matched non-arthroplasty cohort. DESIGN: Case-controlled study analysis of a prospectively collected dataset. SETTING: USA community-based. PARTICIPANTS: 116 people post-THR, 105 people post-TKR compared to 663 people who had not undergone THR or TKR, or had hip or knee osteoarthritis. Cohorts were age-, gender- and BMI-matched. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physical activity assessed using the 12-item PASE at 12 and 24 months post operatively. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in total PASE score between pre-operative to 12 months (mean: 136 vs 135 points; p=0.860) or 24 months following THR (mean: 136 vs 132 points; p=0.950). Whilst there was no significant difference in total PASE score from pre-operative to 12 months post-TKR (126 vs 121 points; p=0.930), by 24 months people following TKR reported significantly greater physical activity (126 vs 142 points; p=0.040). There was no statistically significant difference in physical activity between the normative matched and THR (p≥0.140) or TKR (p≥0.060) cohorts at 12 or 24 months post joint replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity is not appreciably different to pre-operative levels at 12 or 24 months post-THR, but was greater at 24 months following TKR. Health promotion strategies are needed to encourage greater physical activity participation following joint replacement, and particularly targeting those who undergo THR.

Is reconstruction the best management strategy for anterior cruciate ligament rupture? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction versus non-operative treatment.

AIMS: The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal clinical and cost-effective strategy for managing people following ACL rupture. METHODS: A systematic review of the published (AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, psycINFO and the Cochrane Library) and unpublished literature (OpenGrey, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials and the UK National Research Register Archive) was conducted on April 2013. All randomised and non-randomised controlled trials evaluating clinical or health economic outcomes of isolated ligament reconstruction versus non-surgical management following ACL rupture were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro appraisal tool. When appropriate, meta-analysis was conducted to pool data. RESULTS: From a total of 943 citations, sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria. These included 1397 participants, 825 who received ACL reconstruction versus 592 who were managed non-surgically. The methodological quality of the literature was poor. The findings indicated that whilst reconstructed ACL offers significantly greater objective tibiofemoral stability (p<0.001), there appears limited evidence to suggest a superiority between reconstruction versus non-surgical management in functional outcomes. There was a small difference between the management strategies in respect to the development of osteoarthritis during the initial 20 years following index management strategy (Odds Ratio 1.56; p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The current literature is insufficient to base clinical decision-making with respect to treatment opinions for people following ACL rupture. Whilst based on a poor evidence, the current evidence would indicate that people following ACL rupture should receive non-operative interventions before surgical intervention is considered.

Does knee joint proprioception alter following medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction?

BACKGROUND: This study firstly aimed to determine whether proprioception deficits, as measured by joint position sense (JPS), occur in people following recurrent patellar dislocations. Secondly, to determine whether JPS changes following medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFL) reconstruction for patellar instability. METHODS: Thirty people following recurrent patellar dislocation were recruited. Pre-operative JPS was assessed using the passive angle reproduction test. Through this, an assessor moved a participant's limb to a target position. This was returned to neutral, before finally moving the limb again, whilst requiring the participant to indicate when they thought the target angle was reached. The actual angular error (AAE) was calculated as the difference between the perceived angle and target angle. Clinical outcomes included the Kujala Patellofemoral Disorder Score, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, pain, knee motion, extensor muscle strength and frequency of patellar dislocation. Outcomes were assessed pre-operative, 6 weeks, 3 and 12 months. RESULTS: Mean AAE was 2.2° (inner range) to 3.9° (mid-range); this was not clinically significant. There was no statistically significant difference between the baseline-and-6 week, 6 week-and-3 month or baseline-and-12 month AAE measures (p=0.38 to 1.00). There was a statistically significant improvement in functional outcomes as measured by the Kujala score, IKDC form, reduced pain and increased extension strength from baseline to 12 months (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Following recurrent patellar dislocation, patients exhibit minimal deficits in JPS. Whilst MPFL reconstruction significantly improved clinical and functional outcomes for this population, this operation did not significantly alter JPS during the first post-operative year.