Lenka Stroobant, Ewoud Jacobs, Nele Arnout, Stefaan Van Onsem, Thomas Tampere, Arne Burssens, Erik Witvrouw, Jan Victor
{"title":"限制血流治疗能改善不满意的膝关节置换术患者的生活质量和功能吗?","authors":"Lenka Stroobant, Ewoud Jacobs, Nele Arnout, Stefaan Van Onsem, Thomas Tampere, Arne Burssens, Erik Witvrouw, Jan Victor","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.106B12.BJJ-2024-0553.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Approximately 10% to 20% of knee arthroplasty patients are not satisfied with the result, while a clear indication for revision surgery might not be present. Therapeutic options for these patients, who often lack adequate quadriceps strength, are limited. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effect of a novel rehabilitation protocol that combines low-load resistance training (LL-RT) with blood flow restriction (BFR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between May 2022 and March 2024, we enrolled 45 dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients who lacked any clear indication for revision to this prospective cohort study. All patients were at least six months post-surgery and had undergone conventional physiotherapy previously. The patients participated in a supervised LL-RT combined with BFR in 18 sessions. Primary assessments included the following patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS); Knee Society Score: satisfaction (KSSs); the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L); and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS). Functionality was assessed using the six-minute walk Test (6MWT) and the 30-second chair stand test (30CST). Follow-up timepoints were at baseline, six weeks, three months, and six months after the start.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six weeks of BFR with LL-RT improved all the PROMs except the sports subscale of the KOOS compared to baseline. Highest improvements after six weeks were found for quality of life (QoL) (mean 28.2 (SD 17.2) vs 19 (SD 14.7); p = 0.002), activities of daily living (mean 54.7 (SD 18.7) vs 42.9 (SD 17.3); p < 0.001), and KSSs (mean 17.1 (SD 8.8) vs 12.8 (SD 6.7); p < 0.001). PROMs improvements continued to be present at three-month and six-month follow-up compared to baseline. However, no significant differences were observed in the paired comparisons of the six-week, three-month, and six-month follow-up. The same trends are observed for the 6MWT and 30CST.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The reported regime demonstrates improved QoL and function of dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients. In light of this, the pathway described may provide a valuable and safe treatment option for dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients for whom therapeutic options are limited.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"106-B 12","pages":"1416-1425"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can blood flow restriction therapy improve quality of life and function in dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients?\",\"authors\":\"Lenka Stroobant, Ewoud Jacobs, Nele Arnout, Stefaan Van Onsem, Thomas Tampere, Arne Burssens, Erik Witvrouw, Jan Victor\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/0301-620X.106B12.BJJ-2024-0553.R1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Approximately 10% to 20% of knee arthroplasty patients are not satisfied with the result, while a clear indication for revision surgery might not be present. Therapeutic options for these patients, who often lack adequate quadriceps strength, are limited. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effect of a novel rehabilitation protocol that combines low-load resistance training (LL-RT) with blood flow restriction (BFR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between May 2022 and March 2024, we enrolled 45 dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients who lacked any clear indication for revision to this prospective cohort study. All patients were at least six months post-surgery and had undergone conventional physiotherapy previously. The patients participated in a supervised LL-RT combined with BFR in 18 sessions. Primary assessments included the following patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS); Knee Society Score: satisfaction (KSSs); the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L); and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS). Functionality was assessed using the six-minute walk Test (6MWT) and the 30-second chair stand test (30CST). Follow-up timepoints were at baseline, six weeks, three months, and six months after the start.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six weeks of BFR with LL-RT improved all the PROMs except the sports subscale of the KOOS compared to baseline. Highest improvements after six weeks were found for quality of life (QoL) (mean 28.2 (SD 17.2) vs 19 (SD 14.7); p = 0.002), activities of daily living (mean 54.7 (SD 18.7) vs 42.9 (SD 17.3); p < 0.001), and KSSs (mean 17.1 (SD 8.8) vs 12.8 (SD 6.7); p < 0.001). PROMs improvements continued to be present at three-month and six-month follow-up compared to baseline. However, no significant differences were observed in the paired comparisons of the six-week, three-month, and six-month follow-up. The same trends are observed for the 6MWT and 30CST.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The reported regime demonstrates improved QoL and function of dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients. In light of this, the pathway described may provide a valuable and safe treatment option for dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients for whom therapeutic options are limited.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Journal\",\"volume\":\"106-B 12\",\"pages\":\"1416-1425\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.106B12.BJJ-2024-0553.R1\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.106B12.BJJ-2024-0553.R1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:大约10%到20%的膝关节置换术患者对结果不满意,而可能没有明确的翻修手术指征。这些患者通常缺乏足够的股四头肌力量,治疗选择有限。因此,本研究的主要目的是评估一种结合低负荷阻力训练(LL-RT)和血流限制(BFR)的新型康复方案的临床效果。方法:在2022年5月至2024年3月期间,我们招募了45名不满意的膝关节置换术患者,他们缺乏任何明确的适应症来进行这项前瞻性队列研究。所有患者术后至少6个月,既往均接受过常规物理治疗。患者在18个疗程中参加了有监督的LL-RT联合BFR。主要评估包括以下患者报告的结局指标(PROMs):膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分(oos);膝关节社会评分:满意度(KSSs);EuroQol五维五层次问卷(EQ-5D-5L);疼痛灾难化量表(PCS)。使用6分钟步行测试(6MWT)和30秒椅子站立测试(30CST)评估功能。随访时间点为基线、开始后6周、3个月和6个月。结果:与基线相比,6周BFR联合LL-RT改善了KOOS中除运动亚量表外的所有PROMs。6周后生活质量(QoL)的改善最大(平均28.2 (SD 17.2) vs 19 (SD 14.7);p = 0.002),日常生活活动(平均54.7 (SD 18.7) vs 42.9 (SD 17.3);p < 0.001), kss(平均17.1 (SD 8.8) vs 12.8 (SD 6.7);P < 0.001)。与基线相比,在3个月和6个月的随访中,PROMs继续得到改善。然而,在6周、3个月和6个月随访的配对比较中,没有观察到显著差异。6MWT和30CST也有同样的趋势。结论:所报道的方案改善了不满意的膝关节置换术患者的生活质量和功能。鉴于此,所描述的途径可能为治疗选择有限的不满意的膝关节置换术患者提供有价值且安全的治疗选择。
Can blood flow restriction therapy improve quality of life and function in dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients?
Aims: Approximately 10% to 20% of knee arthroplasty patients are not satisfied with the result, while a clear indication for revision surgery might not be present. Therapeutic options for these patients, who often lack adequate quadriceps strength, are limited. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effect of a novel rehabilitation protocol that combines low-load resistance training (LL-RT) with blood flow restriction (BFR).
Methods: Between May 2022 and March 2024, we enrolled 45 dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients who lacked any clear indication for revision to this prospective cohort study. All patients were at least six months post-surgery and had undergone conventional physiotherapy previously. The patients participated in a supervised LL-RT combined with BFR in 18 sessions. Primary assessments included the following patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS); Knee Society Score: satisfaction (KSSs); the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L); and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS). Functionality was assessed using the six-minute walk Test (6MWT) and the 30-second chair stand test (30CST). Follow-up timepoints were at baseline, six weeks, three months, and six months after the start.
Results: Six weeks of BFR with LL-RT improved all the PROMs except the sports subscale of the KOOS compared to baseline. Highest improvements after six weeks were found for quality of life (QoL) (mean 28.2 (SD 17.2) vs 19 (SD 14.7); p = 0.002), activities of daily living (mean 54.7 (SD 18.7) vs 42.9 (SD 17.3); p < 0.001), and KSSs (mean 17.1 (SD 8.8) vs 12.8 (SD 6.7); p < 0.001). PROMs improvements continued to be present at three-month and six-month follow-up compared to baseline. However, no significant differences were observed in the paired comparisons of the six-week, three-month, and six-month follow-up. The same trends are observed for the 6MWT and 30CST.
Conclusion: The reported regime demonstrates improved QoL and function of dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients. In light of this, the pathway described may provide a valuable and safe treatment option for dissatisfied knee arthroplasty patients for whom therapeutic options are limited.
期刊介绍:
We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.