{"title":"Efficacy of the mHealth-Based Exercise Intervention re.flex for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Valerie Dieter, Pia Janssen, Inga Krauss","doi":"10.2196/54356","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Exercise therapy is recommended by international guidelines as a core treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, there is a significant gap between recommendations and practice in health care. Digital exercise apps are promising to help solve this undersupply.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a 12-week fully automated app-based exercise intervention with and without a supporting knee brace on health-related outcomes, performance measures, and adherence in patients with knee osteoarthritis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This closed user group trial included participants with moderate to severe unicondylar painful knee osteoarthritis. Randomization was 1:1:2 into an intervention group (IG) with 2 subgroups (app-based training [IG A] and app-based training and a supportive knee brace [IG AB]) and a control group (CG). The intervention included a 12-week home exercise program with 3 sessions per week. Instructions for the exercises were given via the app and monitored using 2 accelerometers placed below and above the affected knee joint. Participants in the CG did not receive any study intervention but were allowed to make use of usual care. Osteoarthritis-specific pain (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) was defined as the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes included all other Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, general health-related quality of life (Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey), psychological measures (eg, exercise self-efficacy), performance measures (strength and postural control), and the monitoring of adherence and safety. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks. Intervention effects were calculated using baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance for the joint comparison of IG A and IG AB versus the CG using a per-protocol approach. Subgroup analyses were conducted for each IG separately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 61 participants were included (IG: n=30, 49%; CG: n=31, 51%; male: n=31, 51%; female: n=30, 49%; mean age 62.9, SD 8.5 years; mean BMI 27.7, SD 4.5 kg/m<sup>2</sup>). Analysis revealed statistically significant effects in favor of the IG for pain reduction (P<.001; effect size [ES]=0.76), improvements in physical function (P<.001; ES=0.64), improvements in symptoms (P=.01; ES=0.53), improvements in sport and recreation activities (P=.02; ES=0.47), improvements in knee-related quality of life (P<.001; ES=0.76), and improvements in the physical component of general health-related quality of life (P<.001; ES=0.74). Mean differences ranged from 6.0 to 13.2 points (scale range 0-100). ESs indicated small to medium effects. No effects were found for psychological and performance measures. Participants adhered to 92.5% (899/972) of all scheduled exercise sessions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Individuals with knee osteoarthritis undergoing a 12-week sensor-assisted app-based exercise intervention with or without an additional knee brace experienced clinically meaningful treatment effects regarding pain relief and improvements in physical function as well as other osteoarthritis-specific concerns compared to controls.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) DRKS00023269; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00023269.</p>","PeriodicalId":14756,"journal":{"name":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","volume":"12 ","pages":"e54356"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11420596/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/54356","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Exercise therapy is recommended by international guidelines as a core treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis. However, there is a significant gap between recommendations and practice in health care. Digital exercise apps are promising to help solve this undersupply.
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a 12-week fully automated app-based exercise intervention with and without a supporting knee brace on health-related outcomes, performance measures, and adherence in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
Methods: This closed user group trial included participants with moderate to severe unicondylar painful knee osteoarthritis. Randomization was 1:1:2 into an intervention group (IG) with 2 subgroups (app-based training [IG A] and app-based training and a supportive knee brace [IG AB]) and a control group (CG). The intervention included a 12-week home exercise program with 3 sessions per week. Instructions for the exercises were given via the app and monitored using 2 accelerometers placed below and above the affected knee joint. Participants in the CG did not receive any study intervention but were allowed to make use of usual care. Osteoarthritis-specific pain (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) was defined as the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes included all other Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, general health-related quality of life (Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey), psychological measures (eg, exercise self-efficacy), performance measures (strength and postural control), and the monitoring of adherence and safety. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks. Intervention effects were calculated using baseline-adjusted analysis of covariance for the joint comparison of IG A and IG AB versus the CG using a per-protocol approach. Subgroup analyses were conducted for each IG separately.
Results: A total of 61 participants were included (IG: n=30, 49%; CG: n=31, 51%; male: n=31, 51%; female: n=30, 49%; mean age 62.9, SD 8.5 years; mean BMI 27.7, SD 4.5 kg/m2). Analysis revealed statistically significant effects in favor of the IG for pain reduction (P<.001; effect size [ES]=0.76), improvements in physical function (P<.001; ES=0.64), improvements in symptoms (P=.01; ES=0.53), improvements in sport and recreation activities (P=.02; ES=0.47), improvements in knee-related quality of life (P<.001; ES=0.76), and improvements in the physical component of general health-related quality of life (P<.001; ES=0.74). Mean differences ranged from 6.0 to 13.2 points (scale range 0-100). ESs indicated small to medium effects. No effects were found for psychological and performance measures. Participants adhered to 92.5% (899/972) of all scheduled exercise sessions.
Conclusions: Individuals with knee osteoarthritis undergoing a 12-week sensor-assisted app-based exercise intervention with or without an additional knee brace experienced clinically meaningful treatment effects regarding pain relief and improvements in physical function as well as other osteoarthritis-specific concerns compared to controls.
Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) DRKS00023269; https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00023269.
期刊介绍:
JMIR mHealth and uHealth (JMU, ISSN 2291-5222) is a spin-off journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR mHealth and uHealth is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), and in June 2017 received a stunning inaugural Impact Factor of 4.636.
The journal focusses on health and biomedical applications in mobile and tablet computing, pervasive and ubiquitous computing, wearable computing and domotics.
JMIR mHealth and uHealth publishes since 2013 and was the first mhealth journal in Pubmed. It publishes even faster and has a broader scope with including papers which are more technical or more formative/developmental than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.