Exploring experiences of people with knee osteoarthritis who received a physiotherapist-delivered dietary weight loss and exercise intervention: a mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVE: Explore the experiences of people with knee osteoarthritis who received a very low energy diet (VLED) and exercise program from a physiotherapist. METHODS: Mixed methods study involving questionnaires (n=42) and semi-structured interviews (n=22) with randomized control trial participants with knee osteoarthritis who had received a 6-month physiotherapist-delivered VLED weight loss and exercise intervention. Questionnaires measured participant satisfaction, and perceptions about physiotherapist's skills/knowledge in delivery of the dietary intervention (measured on 5-7 point Likert scales). Interviews explored participant's experiences and were analysed based on the principles of reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Questionnaire response: 90%. Participants were satisfied with the program (95%), confident their physiotherapist had the required skills (84%) and knowledge (79%) to deliver the dietary intervention, felt comfortable talking to the physiotherapist about weight (74%), and would recommend others see a physiotherapist for the intervention they undertook (71%). Four themes were developed from the interviews: 1) one-stop-shop of exercise and diet; 2) physiotherapist-delivered weight loss works (unsure initially; successfully lost weight); 3) physiotherapists knowledge and skills (exercise is forte; most thought physiotherapists had the necessary weight loss skills/knowledge, but some disagreed); 4) physiotherapists have a role in weight loss (physiotherapists are intelligent, credible, and trustworthy; specific training in weight loss necessary). CONCLUSION: This study provides, to our knowledge, the first documented perspectives from people with osteoarthritis who have received a physiotherapist-delivered weight loss intervention. Findings suggest physiotherapists may have a role in delivering a protocolised dietary intervention for some people with knee osteoarthritis with overweight and obesity.

The OARSI Joint Effort Initiative: Priorities for osteoarthritis management program implementation and research 2024-2028.

Objective: The Joint Effort Initiative (JEI) is an international collaboration of clinicians, researchers, and consumer organisations with a shared vision of improving the implementation of osteoarthritis management programs (OAMPs). This study aimed to identify JEI's future priorities and guide direction. Design: A two-part international survey to prioritise topics of importance to our membership and research stakeholders. Survey one presented a list of 40 topics under 5 themes. Consenting participants were asked to choose their top three topics in each theme. A short list of 25 topics was presented in survey two. Participants were asked to rank the importance (100-point NRS scale, 100 â€‹= â€‹highest priority). Response frequency (median, IQR) was used to rank the top priorities by theme. Results: Ninety-five participants completed survey one (61% female, 48% clinicians) and 57 completed survey two. The top ranked topic/s were:i. Promotion and advocacy: support training for health professionals (median 85, IQR 24).ii. Education and training: incorporating behaviour change into OAMPs (80, 16), advanced OA skills (80, 30), and integration of OA education into clinical training (80, 36).iii. Improving OAMPs delivery: regular updates on changes to best-evidence OA care (84, 24).iv. Future research: improve uptake of exercise, physical activity, and weight-loss (89, 16).v. Enhancing relationships, alliances, and shared knowledge: promote research collaborations (81, 30), share challenges and opportunities for OAMP implementation (80, 23). Conclusions: These topics will set the JEI's research and collaboration agenda for the next 5 years and stimulate ideas for others working in the field.

Optimising the process of knowledge mobilisation in Communities of Practice: recommendations from a (multi-method) qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Communities of Practice (CoPs) offer a strategy for mobilising knowledge and integrating evidence-based interventions into musculoskeletal practice, yet little is known about their practical application in this context. This study aimed to (i) explore the process of knowledge mobilisation in the context of a CoP to implement evidence-based interventions in musculoskeletal care and (ii) co-develop recommendations to optimise the process of knowledge mobilisation in CoPs. METHODS: A qualitative study comprising observation of a CoP and related planning meetings (n = 5), and interviews with CoP stakeholders (including clinicians, lay members, managers, commissioners, academics) (n = 15) was undertaken. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and interpreted considering the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services theory. Public contributors were collaboratively involved at key stages of the study. RESULTS: Four themes were identified: identifying and interpreting knowledge, practical implementation of a CoP, culture and relationship building, and responding to the external context. Resource and infrastructure enabled the set-up, delivery and running of the CoP. Support for lay members is recommended to ensure effective participation and equity of power. CoP aims and purpose can develop iteratively, and this may enhance the ability to respond to contextual changes. Several recommendations for the practical application of CoPs are suggested to create the best environment for knowledge exchange and creation, support an equitable platform for participation, and help members to navigate and make sense of the CoP in a flexible way. CONCLUSION: This study identified how a CoP with diverse membership can promote partnership working at the intersection between knowledge and practice. Several important considerations for preparing for and operationalising the approach in implementation have been identified. Evaluation of the costs, effectiveness and impact of CoPs is needed to better understand the value added by the approach. More broadly, research is needed to explore the practical application of online CoPs and the role of international CoPs in optimising the uptake of innovations and best practice.

Cost-Effectiveness of Telehealth-Delivered Exercise and Dietary Weight Loss Programs for Knee Osteoarthritis Within a Twelve-Month Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered exercise and diet-plus-exercise programs within 12 months. METHODS: An economic evaluation within a 12-month, 3-arm, parallel randomized trial of two 6-month telehealth-delivered exercise programs, with and without a dietary component. A total of 415 people with knee osteoarthritis ages 45-80 years and body mass index of 28-40 kg/m2 were assigned to 1 of 2 telehealth-delivered exercise programs, 1 without (n = 172) and 1 with (n = 175) a dietary component (ketogenic very low calorie diet), or to an education control (n = 67), for 6 months, with 6 months follow-up. The primary economic outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health system costs. Measured costs were the direct intervention (consultations, equipment/resources, and meal replacements) and health care use in 2020 Australian dollars ($AU1.5 = $US1). Secondary analysis included weight loss and work productivity gains. RESULTS: The clinical trial demonstrated greater improvements in pain and function compared to information only for individuals with knee osteoarthritis and overweight/obesity. We can be 88% confident that diet plus exercise is cost effective ($45,500 per QALY), 53% confident that exercise is cost-effective ($67,600 per QALY) compared to the control, and 86% confident that augmenting exercise with the diet program is cost effective ($21,100 per QALY). CONCLUSION: Telehealth-delivered programs targeting exercise with dietary intervention for people with knee osteoarthritis who have overweight/obesity are likely to be cost-effective, particularly if potential long-term gains from weight loss and work productivity are realized.

Effectiveness of a telehealth physiotherapist-delivered intensive dietary weight loss program combined with exercise in people with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity: study protocol for the POWER randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Weight loss, alongside exercise, is a recommended treatment for individuals with knee OA and overweight/obesity. However, many patients cannot access weight loss specialists such as dietitians. Innovative care models expanding roles of other clinicians may increase access to weight loss support for people with knee OA. Physiotherapists may be well placed to deliver such support. This two-group parallel, superiority randomized controlled trial aims to compare a physiotherapist-delivered diet and exercise program to an exercise program alone, over 6 months. The primary hypothesis is that the physiotherapist-delivered diet plus exercise program will lead to greater weight loss than the exercise program. METHODS: 88 participants with painful knee OA and body mass index (BMI) > 27 kg/m2 will be recruited from the community. Following baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to either exercise alone or diet plus exercise groups. Participants in the exercise group will have 6 consultations (20-30 min) via videoconference with a physiotherapist over 6 months for a strengthening exercise program, physical activity plan and educational/exercise resources. Participants in the diet plus exercise group will have 6 consultations (50-75 min) via videoconference with a physiotherapist prescribing a ketogenic very low-calorie diet with meal replacements and educational resources to support weight loss and healthy eating, plus the intervention of the exercise only group. Outcomes are measured at baseline and 6 months. The primary outcome is percentage change in body weight measured by a blinded assessor. Secondary outcomes include self-reported knee pain, physical function, global change in knee problems, quality of life, physical activity levels, and internalised weight stigma, as well as BMI, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, physical performance measures and quadriceps strength, measured by a blinded assessor. Additional measures include adherence, adverse events, fidelity and process measures. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine whether a physiotherapist-delivered diet plus exercise program is more effective for weight loss than an exercise only program. Findings will inform the development and implementation of innovative health service models addressing weight management and exercise for patients with knee OA and overweight/obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NIH US National Library of Medicine, Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04733053 (Feb 1 2021).

Comparing Video-Based, Telehealth-Delivered Exercise and Weight Loss Programs With Online Education on Outcomes of Knee Osteoarthritis : A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Scalable knee osteoarthritis programs are needed to deliver recommended education, exercise, and weight loss interventions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two 6-month, telehealth-delivered exercise programs, 1 with and 1 without dietary intervention. DESIGN: 3-group, parallel randomized (5:5:2) trial. (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618000930280). SETTING: Australian private health insurance members. PARTICIPANTS: 415 persons with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis and a body mass index between 28 and 40 kg/m2 who were aged 45 to 80 years. INTERVENTION: All groups received access to electronic osteoarthritis information (control). The exercise program comprised 6 physiotherapist consultations via videoconference for exercise, self-management advice, and behavioral counseling, plus exercise equipment and resources. The diet and exercise program included an additional 6 dietitian consultations for a ketogenic very-low-calorie diet (2 formulated meal replacements and a low-carbohydrate meal daily) followed by a transition to healthy eating, as well as nutrition and behavioral resources. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes were changes in knee pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] of 0 to 10, higher indicating worse) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]; scale, 0 to 68, higher indicating worse) at 6 months (primary time point) and 12 months. Secondary outcomes were weight, physical activity, quality of life, mental health, global change, satisfaction, willingness to have surgery, orthopedic appointments, and knee surgery. RESULTS: A total of 379 participants (91%) provided 6-month primary outcomes, and 372 (90%) provided 12-month primary outcomes. At 6 months, both programs were superior to control for pain (between-group mean difference in change on NRS: diet and exercise, -1.5 [95% CI, -2.1 to -0.8]; exercise, -0.8 [CI, -1.5 to -0.2]) and function (between-group mean difference in change on WOMAC: diet and exercise, -9.8 [CI, -12.5 to -7.0]; exercise, -7.0 [CI, -9.7 to -4.2]). The diet and exercise program was superior to exercise (pain, -0.6 [CI, -1.1 to -0.2]; function, -2.8 [CI, -4.7 to -0.8]). Findings were similar at 12 months. LIMITATION: Participants and clinicians were unblinded. CONCLUSION: Telehealth-delivered exercise and diet programs improved pain and function in people with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity. A dietary intervention conferred modest additional pain and function benefits over exercise. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Medibank, the Medibank Better Health Foundation Research Fund, and a National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence.

The relationship between multisite peripheral joint pain and physical activity levels in older adults: A cross-sectional survey.

INTRODUCTION: Research on levels of physical activity (PA) in those with peripheral joint pain have only focused on single sites, in the knee or hips. This study investigated the levels of PA in adults with single-site and multisite peripheral joint pain compared to adults with no joint pain. METHODS: Analysis of a cross-sectional population survey mailed to adults aged ≥45 years (n = 28,443) was conducted. Respondents reported any peripheral joint pain in the last 12 months in either the hands, hips, knees or feet; PA levels were self-reported using the short telephone activity rating scale. The association between PA levels, peripheral joint pain and outcomes of health status (physical and mental component scores, using SF-12) pain intensity (10-point scale) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (EQ-5D) were investigated using analysis of variance and ordinal regressions. RESULTS: Compared to those with no joint pain, all pain groups reported lower levels of PA: joint pain in one site (odds ratio = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83-0.99); two sites (0.74, 0.67-0.81), three sites (0.65, 0.59-0.72) and four sites (0.47, 0.42-0.53). Across all joint pain groups, levels of PA were associated with pain intensity, physical health status, mental health status and HRQoL. DISCUSSION: Adults with more sites of peripheral joint pain were more likely to report lower levels of PA. Those with more sites of pain and lower levels of PA reported poorer outcomes. Health care providers should be aware that those with multisite joint pain are most likely to have low levels of PA.

The attitudes towards, and beliefs about, physical activity in people with osteoarthritis and comorbidity: A qualitative investigation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the attitudes towards, and beliefs about, physical activity (PA) in older adults with osteoarthritis (OA) and comorbidity to understand experiences and seek ways to improve PA participation. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with adults aged ≥45, with self-reported OA and comorbidity (N = 17). Face-to-face interviews explored participant perspectives regarding; (1) attitudes and beliefs about PA in the context of OA and comorbidity and (2) how people with OA and comorbidity could be encouraged to improve and maintain PA levels. Data were transcribed verbatim and inductive thematic analysis was undertaken using a framework approach. RESULTS: Participants did not conceptualise multiple long-term conditions (LTCs) together and instead self-prioritised OA over other LTCs. Barriers to PA included uncertainty about both the general management of individual LTCs and the effectiveness of PA for their LTCs; and, negative perceptions about their health, ageing and PA. Participants experienced dynamic and co-existing barriers to PA, and problematized this as a multi-level process, identifying a barrier, then a solution, followed by a new barrier. Facilitators of PA included social support and support from knowledgeable healthcare professionals (HCPs), together with PA adapted for OA and comorbidity and daily life. PA levels could be increased through targeted interventions to increase self-efficacy for managing OA alongside other LTCs and self-efficacy for PA. CONCLUSION: People with OA and comorbidity experience complicated PA barriers. To increase PA levels, tailored PA interventions could include HCP and social support to anticipate and overcome multi-level PA barriers and target increased self-efficacy for LTC management and PA.

New developments in osteoarthritis pharmacological therapies.

OA is an increasingly common, painful condition with complex aetiology and limited therapies. Approaches to expanding our therapeutic armamentarium have included repurposing existing therapies used for other rheumatological conditions, modifying existing OA preparations to enhance their benefits, and identifying new therapeutics. HCQ and low-dose MTX have been unsuccessful in improving hand OA pain or reducing structural progression. Anti-IL-6 and anti-GM-CSF also did not improve symptoms in hand OA trials, but IL-1 remains an intriguing target for large-joint OA, based on reduced joint replacements in a post hoc analysis from a large cardiovascular disease trial. The peripheral nociceptive pathway appears an attractive target, with mAbs to nerve growth factor and IA capsaicin demonstrating efficacy; tropomyosin receptor kinase A inhibitors are at an earlier stage of development. Limited evidence suggests pharmacological therapies can modify cartilage and bone structural progression, though evidence of synchronous symptom benefits are lacking.

Improving osteoarthritis management in primary healthcare: results from a quasi-experimental study.

BACKGROUND: To improve quality of care for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), general practitioners (GPs) and physiotherapists (PTs) in a Norwegian municipality initiated an intervention. The intervention aimed to increase provision of core OA treatment (information, exercise, and weight control) prior to referral for surgery, rational use of imaging for assessing OA and improve communication between healthcare professionals. This study assessed the effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS: Forty-eight PTs and one hundred one GPs were invited to the intervention that included two interactive workshops outlining best practice and an accompanying template for PT discharge reports. Using interrupted time series research design, the study period was divided into three: pre-implementation, transition (implementation) and post-implementation. Comparing the change between pre- and post-implementation, the primary outcome was patient-reported quality of OA care measured with the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were number of PT discharge reports, information included in GP referral letters to orthopaedic surgeon, the proportion of GP referral letters indicating use of core treatment, and the use of imaging within OA assessment. Analyses involved linear mixed and logistic regression models. RESULTS: The PT workshop had 30 attendees, and 31 PTs and 33 GPs attended the multidisciplinary workshop. Two hundred eight and one hundred twenty-five patients completed the questionnaire during pre- and post-implementation, respectively. The adjusted model showed a small, statistically non-significant, increase in mean total score for quality of OA care (mean change = 4.96, 95% CI -0.18, 10.12, p:0.057), which was mainly related to items on OA core treatment. Patients had higher odds of reporting receipt of information on treatment alternatives (odds ratio (OR) 1.9, 95% CI 1.08, 3.24) and on self-management (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.33, 4.32) in the post-implementation phase. There was a small, statistically non-significant, increase in the proportion of GP referral letters indicating prior use of core treatment modalities. There were negligible changes in the number of PT discharge reports, in the information included in the GP referral letters, and in the use of imaging for OA assessment. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that a primary care intervention including two inter-active workshops can shift the quality of care towards best practice recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02876120 .

Risk-stratified and stepped models of care for back pain and osteoarthritis: are we heading towards a common model?

The overall quality of care for musculoskeletal pain conditions is suboptimal, partly due to a considerable evidence-practice gap. In osteoarthritis and low back pain, structured models of care exist to help overcome that challenge. In osteoarthritis, focus is on stepped care models, where treatment decisions are guided by response to treatment, and increasingly comprehensive interventions are only offered to people with inadequate response to more simple care. In low back pain, the most widely known approach is based on risk stratification, where patients with higher predicted risk of poor outcome are offered more comprehensive care. For both conditions, the recommended interventions and models of care share many commonalities and there is no evidence that one model of care is more effective than the other. Limitations of existing models of care include a lack of integrated information on social factors, comorbid conditions, and previous treatment experience, and they do not support an interplay between health care, self-management, and community-based activities. Moving forwards, a common model across musculoskeletal conditions seems realistic, which points to an opportunity for reducing the complexity of implementation. We foresee this development will use big data sources and machine-learning methods to combine stepped and risk-stratified care and to integrate self-management support and patient-centred care to a greater extent in future models of care.

Better Knee, Better Me™: effectiveness of two scalable health care interventions supporting self-management for knee osteoarthritis - protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although education, exercise, and weight loss are recommended for management of knee osteoarthritis, the additional benefits of incorporating weight loss strategies into exercise interventions have not been well investigated. The aim of this study is to compare, in a private health insurance setting, the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a remotely-delivered, evidence- and theory-informed, behaviour change intervention targeting exercise and self-management (Exercise intervention), with the same intervention plus active weight management (Exercise plus weight management intervention), and with an information-only control group for people with knee osteoarthritis who are overweight or obese. METHODS: Three-arm, pragmatic parallel-design randomised controlled trial involving 415 people aged ≥45 and ≤ 80 years, with body mass index ≥28 kg/m2 and < 41 kg/m2 and painful knee osteoarthritis. Recruitment is Australia-wide amongst Medibank private health insurance members. All three groups receive access to a bespoke website containing information about osteoarthritis and self-management. Participants in the Exercise group also receive six consultations with a physiotherapist via videoconferencing over 6 months, including prescription of a strengthening exercise and physical activity program, advice about management, and additional educational resources. The Exercise plus weight management group receive six consultations with a dietitian via videoconferencing over 6 months, which include a very low calorie ketogenic diet with meal replacements and resources to support behaviour change, in addition to the interventions of the Exercise group. Outcomes are measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Primary outcomes are self-reported knee pain and physical function at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include weight, physical activity levels, quality of life, global rating of change, satisfaction with care, knee surgery and/or appointments with an orthopaedic surgeon, and willingness to undergo surgery. Additional measures include adherence, adverse events, self-efficacy, and perceived usefulness of intervention components. Cost-effectiveness of each intervention will also be assessed. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic study will determine whether a scalable remotely-delivered service combining weight management with exercise is more effective than a service with exercise alone, and with both compared to an information-only control group. Findings will inform development and implementation of future remotely-delivered services for people with knee osteoarthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618000930280 (01/06/2018).

Defining adherence to therapeutic exercise for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the meaning of the term 'adherence' (including conceptual and measurement definitions) in the context of therapeutic exercise (TE) for musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. DESIGN: Systematic review using a search strategy including terms for: adherence, TE and MSK pain. Identified studies were independently screened for inclusion by two researchers. Two independent researchers extracted data on: study type; MSK pain population; type of TE used; definitions, parameters, measurement methods and values of adherence. DATA SOURCES: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2016. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Any study type featuring TE for adults with MSK pain and containing a definition of adherence, or a description of how adherence was measured. RESULTS: 459 studies were identified and 86 were included in the review. Most were prospective cohort studies and featured back and/or neck pain. Strengthening and stretching were the most common types of TE. A clearly identifiable definition of adherence was provided in 40% of the studies, with 12% using the same definition. Exercise frequency was the most commonly measured parameter of adherence, with self-report logs the most common measurement method. The most common value range used to determine satisfactory adherence was 80%-99% of the recommended exercise dose. CONCLUSION: No single definition of adherence to TE was apparent. We found no definition of adherence that specifically related to TE for MSK pain or described the dimensions of TE that should be measured. We recommend conceptualising adherence to TE for MSK pain from the perspective of all relevant stakeholders.

Do comorbidities predict pain and function in knee osteoarthritis following an exercise intervention, and do they moderate the effect of exercise? Analyses of data from three randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Although exercise is a core treatment for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA), it is currently unknown whether those with additional comorbidities respond differently to exercise than those without. We explored whether comorbidities predict pain and function following an exercise intervention in people with knee OA, and whether they moderate response to: exercise versus no exercise; and enhanced exercise versus usual exercise-based care. METHODS: We undertook analyses of existing data from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs): TOPIK (n = 217), APEX (n = 352) and Benefits of Effective Exercise for knee Pain (BEEP) (n = 514). All three RCTs included: adults with knee pain attributable to OA; physiotherapy-led exercise; data on six comorbidities (overweight/obesity, pain elsewhere, anxiety/depression, cardiac problems, diabetes mellitus and respiratory conditions); the outcomes of interest (six-month Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index knee pain and function). Adjusted mixed models were fitted where data was available; otherwise linear regression models were used. RESULTS: Obesity compared with underweight/normal body mass index was significantly associated with knee pain following exercise, as was the presence compared with absence of anxiety/depression. The presence of cardiac problems was significantly associated with the effect of enhanced versus usual exercise-based care for knee function, indicating that enhanced exercise may be less effective for improving knee function in people with cardiac problems. Associations for all other potential prognostic factors and moderators were weak and not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity and anxiety/depression predicted pain and function outcomes in people offered an exercise intervention, but only the presence of cardiac problems might moderate the effect of exercise for knee OA. Further confirmatory investigations are required.

Identification and Evaluation of Self-Report Physical Activity Instruments in Adults With Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and evaluate the measurement properties of self-report physical activity instruments suitable for patients with osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive 2-stage systematic review using multiple electronic databases, from inception until July 2018. In the stage 1 review, we sought to identify all self-report physical activity instruments used in individuals with joint pain attributable to OA in the foot, knee, hip, or hand. In the stage 2 review, we searched for and appraised studies investigating the measurement properties of the instruments identified. In both stages of the review, we screened all articles for study eligibility criteria, completed data extraction using the Qualitative Attributes and Measurement Properties of Physical Activity questionnaire checklist, and conducted methodology quality assessments using a modified COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) checklist. Measurement properties for each physical activity instrument were evaluated and combined, using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: In the stage 1 review, we identified 23 unique self-report physical activity instruments. In the stage 2 review, we identified 54 studies that evaluated the measurement properties of 13 of the 23 instruments identified. Instrument reliability varied from inadequate to adequate (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.7). Instrument construct and criterion validity assessment showed small to moderate correlations with direct measures of physical activity. Instrument responsiveness was assessed in only 1 instrument and was unable to detect changes in comparison to accelerometers. CONCLUSION: Although many instruments were identified as being potentially suitable for use in patients with OA, none demonstrated adequate measurement properties across all domains of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Further high-quality assessment of self-report physical activity instruments is required before such measures can be recommended for use in OA research.

How Do Physical Therapists in the United Kingdom Manage Patients With Hip Osteoarthritis? Results of a Cross-Sectional Survey.

Background: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is common, painful, and disabling. Physical therapists have an important role in managing patients with hip OA; however, little is known about their current management approach and whether it aligns with clinical guideline recommendations. Objective: The objective of this study is to describe United Kingdom (UK) physical therapists' current management of patients with hip OA and to determine whether it aligns with clinical guidelines. Design: The design is a cross-section questionnaire. Methods: A questionnaire was mailed to 3126 physical therapists in the UK that explored physical therapists' self-reported management of a patient with hip OA using a case vignette and clinical management questions. Results: The response rate was 52.7% (n = 1646). In total, 1148 (69.7%) physical therapists had treated a patient with hip OA in the last 6 months and were included in the analyses. A treatment package was commonly provided incorporating advice, exercise (strength training 95.9%; general physical activity 85.4%), and other nonpharmacological modalities, predominantly manual therapy (69.6%), and gait retraining (66.4%). There were some differences in reported management between physical therapists based in the National Health Service (NHS) and non-NHS-based physical therapists, including fewer treatment sessions being provided by NHS-based therapists. Limitations: Limitations include the potential for nonresponder bias and, in clinical practice, physical therapists may manage patients with hip OA differently. Conclusion: UK-based physical therapists commonly provide a package of care for patients with hip OA that is broadly in line with current clinical guidelines, including advice, exercise, and other nonpharmacological treatments. There were some differences in clinical practice between NHS and non-NHS-based physical therapists, but whether these differences impact on clinical outcomes remains unknown.