https://www.just.edu.jo/DIC/ClinicGuidlines/Management%20of%20hip%20and%20knee%20Osteoarthritis.pdf

OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, Part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines

Objectives: To update the EULAR recommendations for management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) by an evidence based medicine and expert opinion approach. Methods: The literature search and guidelines were restricted to treatments for knee OA pertaining to clinical and/or radiological OA of any compartment of the knee. Papers for combined treatment of knee and other types of OA were excluded. Medline and Embase were searched using a combination of subject headings and key words. Searches for those treatments previously investigated were conducted for January 1999 to February 2002 and for those treatments not previously investigated for 1966 to February 2002. The level of evidence found for each treatment was documented. Quality scores were determined for each paper, an effect size comparing the treatment with placebo was calculated, where possible, and a toxicity profile was determined for each treatment modality. Results: 497 new publications were identified by the search. Of these, 103 were intervention trials and included in the overall analysis, and 33 treatment modalities were identified. Previously identified publications which were not exclusively knee OA in the initial analysis were rejected. In total, 545 publications were included. Based on the results of the literature search and expert opinion, 10 recommendations for the treatment of knee OA were devised using a five stage Delphi technique. Based on expert opinion, a further set of 10 items was identified by a five stage Delphi technique as important for future research. Conclusion: The updated recommendations support some of the previous propositions published in 2000 but also include modified statements and new propositions. Although a large number of treatment options for knee OA exist, the evidence based format of the EULAR Recommendations continues to identify key clinical questions that currently are unanswered.

/pdf/eular-recommendations-2003-an-evidence-based-approach-to-the-4vlvn0p198.pdf

EULAR Recommendations 2003: an evidence based approach to the management of knee osteoarthritis: Report of a Task Force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT)

Considerable knowledge has accumulated in recent decades concerning the significance of physical activity in the treatment of a number of diseases, including diseases that do not primarily manifest as disorders of the locomotive apparatus. In this review we present the evidence for prescribing exercise therapy in the treatment of metabolic syndrome-related disorders (insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension, obesity), heart and pulmonary diseases (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, chronic heart failure, intermittent claudication), muscle, bone and joint diseases (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome) and cancer, depression, asthma and type 1 diabetes. For each disease, we review the effect of exercise therapy on disease pathogenesis, on symptoms specific to the diagnosis, on physical fitness or strength and on quality of life. The possible mechanisms of action are briefly examined and the principles for prescribing exercise therapy are discussed, focusing on the type and amount of exercise and possible contraindications.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1600-0838.2006.00520.x

Evidence for prescribing exercise as therapy in chronic disease.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/1529-0131%28200110%2945%3A5%3C453%3A%3AAID-ART365%3E3.0.CO%3B2-W

The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties

The Mechanisms of Manual Therapy in the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Pain: A Comprehensive Model

Background: Few investigations include both subjective and objective measurements of the effectiveness of treatments for osteoarthritis of the knee. Beneficial interventions may decrease the disability associated with osteoarthritis and the need for more invasive treatments. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of physical therapy for osteoarthritis of the knee, applied by experienced physical therapists with formal training in manual therapy. Design: Randomized, controlled clinical trial. Setting: Outpatient physical therapy department of a large military medical center. Patients: 83 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee who were randomly assigned to receive treatment (n = 42; 15 men and 27 women [mean age, 60 ± 11 years]) or placebo (n = 41; 19 men and 22 women [mean age, 62 ± 10 years]). Intervention: The treatment group received manual therapy, applied to the knee as well as to the lumbar spine, hip, and ankle as required, and performed a standardized knee exercise program in the clinic and at home. The placebo group had subtherapeutic ultrasound to the knee at an intensity of 0.1 W/cm 2 with a 10% pulsed mode. Both groups were treated at the clinic twice weekly for 4 weeks. Measurements: Distance walked in 6 minutes and sum of the function, pain, and stiffness subscores of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). A tester who was blinded to group assignment made group comparisons at the initial visit (before initiation of treatment), 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 1 year. Results: Clinically and statistically significant improvements in 6-minute walk distance and WOMAC score at 4 weeks and 8 weeks were seen in the treatment group but not the placebo group. By 8 weeks, average 6-minute walk distances had improved by 13.1 % and WOMAC scores had improved by 55.8% over baseline values in the treatment group (P < 0.05). After controlling for potential confounding variables, the average distance walked in 6 minutes at 8 weeks among patients in the treatment group was 170 m (95% Cl, 71 to 270 m) more than that in the placebo group and the average WOMAC scores were 599 mm higher (95% Cl, 197 to 1002 mm). At 1 year, patients in the treatment group had clinically and statistically significant gains over baseline WOMAC scores and walking distance; 20% of patients in the placebo group and 5% of patients in the treatment group had undergone knee arthroplasty. Conclusions: A combination of manual physical therapy and supervised exercise yields functional benefits for patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and may delay or prevent the need for surgical intervention.

Effectiveness of Manual Physical Therapy and Exercise in Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

A combination of manual physical therapy and supervised exercise yields functional benefits for patients with osteoarthritis of the knee and may delay or prevent the need for surgical intervention.

Effectiveness of Manual Physical Therapy and Exercise in Osteoarthritis of the Knee

Annals of Internal Medicine Effectiveness of Manual Physical Therapy and Exercise in Osteoarthritis of the Knee A Randomized, Controlled Trial

To the Editor: We were both surprised and disappointed to learn of the categorical deletion of research involving the use of manual physical therapy from the Philadelphia Panel Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Manual physical therapy is actively practiced in the majority of clinics in the United States and Canada, is part of the Guide to Physical Therapist Practice ,1 is included in the normative model of physical therapist education curriculum, and is a large part of mainstream physical therapist practice. Therefore, it is perplexing that the authors of the Philadelphia Panel reported “one RCT was excluded because manual therapy was used as the comparison intervention.”2(p1681) This statement is notably ambiguous. The exclusion could be due to a categorical bias against manually applied physical therapy. Alternatively, the authors could have been concerned about the inability to separate the effects of passive movement imparted by the treating therapist from the effects of active and passive movement performed by the patient. The first possible explanation is the least acceptable, as bias is no more appropriate in systematic review research than in original research. The second possible explanation is academic hairsplitting that is more likely to foster debate than better patient care.

Although attempts to isolate individual effects are desirable in basic research, applied clinical research questions are often better answered by studying realistic clinical treatment regimens. Most of our practice remains undefined thanks to a slavish adherence to the reductionist approach. Physical therapist researchers have labored in vain to tease out the effects …

/pdf/is-manual-physical-therapy-distinct-from-physical-therapy-4mceb4p992.pdf

Robert L. Matekel

Papers

Effectiveness of Manual Physical Therapy and Exercise in Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Effectiveness of Manual Physical Therapy and Exercise in Osteoarthritis of the Knee

Annals of Internal Medicine Effectiveness of Manual Physical Therapy and Exercise in Osteoarthritis of the Knee A Randomized, Controlled Trial

Is manual physical therapy distinct from physical therapy clinical practice