French, Helen, Cusack, Tara, Brennan, Aisling, Fitzpatrick, Martina, Caffrey, Aoife, Gilsenan, Clare, Cuddy, Vanessa, White, Breon, Kane, David, O'Connell, Paul, FitzGerald, Oliver, McCarthy, Geraldine M., Yoshida, Kanako, Gregory, Jennifer S., Mason, Barbara, Reid, Ian, Reid, David M., Soni, Anushka, Nüesch, Eveline, Juni, Peter, Reichenbach, Stephan, Dieppe, Paul, White, Omeco B., Intekhab-Alam, Nabila Y., Chowdrey, Hardial S., Knight, Richard A., Locke, Ian C., Wenham, Claire, Grainger, Andrew J., Hensor, Elizabeth M., Conaghan, Philip, Abraham, Ajay, Pearce, Mark S., Francis, Roger M., Birrell, Fraser, Ferrell, William R., Kelso, Elizabeth B., Lockhart, John C., Burns, Elizabeth, Plevin, Robin, and McInnes, Iain B.
Background: Current evidence indicates that exercise therapy (ET) has a short and medium-term benefit for hip osteoarthritis (OA), but evidence is inconclusive regarding the effect of manual therapy (MT). The primary aim of this randomised controlled trial was to determine the effectiveness of ET with and without MT on clinical outcomes for individuals with hip OA. A secondary aim was to ascertain the effect of an 8-week waiting period on outcomes. Methods: 131 men and women with hip OA recruited in four hospitals were initially randomised to one of three groups: ET (n = 45), a combination of ET and MT (n = 43) and wait-list control (n = 43). The two intervention groups underwent individualised ET or ET/MT for 8 weeks. Patients in the control group waited 8 weeks and were randomised to receive either ET or ET/MT after 9 week follow-up, and pooled with original treatment group data: ET (n = 66) and ET/ MT (n = 65). All participants were followed up at 9 and 18 weeks and the control group was reassessed at 27 weeks (18 weeks post-treatment) by the same blinded assessor. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Other outcomes included sit-to-stand, 50-foot walk test, pain severity, hip range of motion (ROM), anxiety, depression, quality of life (QOL), analgesic usage, physical activity, patient-perceived change and patient satisfaction. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed to determine within-group change and between-group differences for the three groups at baseline and 9 weeks, and the two treatment groups at baseline, 9 and 18 weeks. Results: Eight patients (6.1%) were lost to follow-up at 9 weeks and 19 (14.5%) were lost to follow-up by 18 weeks. Both ET (n = 66) and ET/MT groups (n = 65) showed significant within-group improvements in WOMAC, pain severity, sit-to-stand and HROM measures at 9 weeks, which were still evident at 18 weeks. There was no significant within-group change in anxiety, depression, QOL, analgesic usage, 50-foot walk test or physical activity. There was no significant difference between the two intervention groups for any of the outcomes. Regarding the results of the original ET, ET/MT and control group allocation, there was a significant improvement in one or both ET and ET/MT groups compared with the control group in the same outcomes, as well as patient perceived improvement at 9 weeks. There was no significant difference between the three groups in analgesic usage, WOMAC stiffness subscale, sit-to-stand and 50 foot walk tests, QOL and physical activity. There was an overall deterioration in anxiety and depression scores. Conclusions: The addition of MT to an 8 week programme of ET for hip OA resulted in similar improvements in pain, function and ROM at 9 and 18 weeks. The significant improvement which occurred in the same outcomes in the two treatment groups compared with a wait-list control of 8 weeks has implications for waiting list management Disclosure statement: The authors have declared no conflicts of interest