Suchergebnisse

Abstract

Background
Mechanistic factors on the pathway to improving independent ambulatory ability among hip fracture patients by a multicomponent home-based physical therapy intervention that emphasized aerobic, strength, balance, and functional training are unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of 2 different home-based physical therapy programs on muscle area and attenuation (reflects muscle density) of the lower extremities, bone mineral density (BMD), and aerobic capacity.


Methods
Randomized controlled trial of home-based 16 weeks of strength, endurance, balance, and function exercises (PUSH, n = 19) compared to seated active range-of-motion exercises and transcutaneous electrical neurostimulation (PULSE, n = 18) in community-dwelling adults >60 years of age within 26 weeks of hip fracture.


Results
In PUSH and PULSE groups combined, the fractured leg had lower muscle area and muscle attenuation and higher subcutaneous fat than the nonfractured leg (p < .001) at baseline. At 16 weeks, mean muscle area of the fractured leg was higher in the PUSH than PULSE group (p = .04). Changes in muscle area were not significantly different when compared to the comparative PULSE group. There was a clinically relevant difference in change in femoral neck BMD between groups (p = .05) that showed an increase after PULSE and decrease after PUSH. There were generally no between-group differences in mean VO2peak tests at 16-week follow-up, except the PUSH group reached a higher max incline (p = .04).


Conclusions
The treatment effects of a multicomponent home-based physical therapy intervention on muscle composition, BMD, and aerobic capacity were not significantly different than an active control intervention in older adults recovering from hip fracture.


Trial Registration
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01783704

Osteoarthritis is a syndrome affecting a variety of patient profiles. A European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis and the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society working meeting explored the possibility of identifying different patient profiles in osteoarthritis. The risk factors for the development of osteoarthritis include systemic factors (e.g., age, sex, obesity, genetics, race, and bone density) and local biomechanical factors (e.g., obesity, sport, joint injury, and muscle weakness); most also predict disease progression, particularly joint injury, malalignment, and synovitis/effusion. The characterization of patient profiles should help to better orientate research, facilitate trial design, and define which patients are the most likely to benefit from treatment. There are a number of profile candidates. Generalized, polyarticular osteoarthritis and local, monoarticular osteoarthritis appear to be two different profiles; the former is a feature of osteoarthritis co-morbid with inflammation or the metabolic syndrome, while the latter is more typical of post-trauma osteoarthritis, especially in cases with severe malalignment. Other biomechanical factors may also define profiles, such as joint malalignment, loss of meniscal function, and ligament injury. Early- and late-stage osteoarthritis appear as separate profiles, notably in terms of treatment response. Finally, there is evidence that there are two separate profiles related to lesions in the subchondral bone, which may determine benefit from bone-active treatments. Decisions on appropriate therapy should be made considering clinical presentation, underlying pathophysiology, and stage of disease. Identification of patient profiles may lead to more personalized healthcare, with more targeted treatment for osteoarthritis.