A1 Journal article (refereed)
Impact or no impact for women with mild knee osteoarthritis? : A Bayesian meta‐analysis of two RCT's with contrasting interventions (2021)


Heikkinen, Risto; Waller, Benjamin; Munukka, Matti; Multanen, Juhani; Heinonen, Ari; Karvanen, Juha (2021). Impact or no impact for women with mild knee osteoarthritis? : A Bayesian meta‐analysis of two RCT's with contrasting interventions. Arthritis Care and Research, Early online. DOI: 10.1002/acr.24553


JYU authors or editors


Publication details

All authors or editors: Heikkinen, Risto; Waller, Benjamin; Munukka, Matti; Multanen, Juhani; Heinonen, Ari; Karvanen, Juha

Journal or series: Arthritis Care and Research

ISSN: 2151-464X

eISSN: 2151-4658

Publication year: 2021

Volume: Early online

Publisher: John Wiley & Sons

Publication country: United States

Publication language: English

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.24553

Open Access: Open access publication published in a hybrid channel

Publication channel open access:

Publication open access:


Abstract

Objective: We aim to predict the probability of a benefit from two contrasting exercise programs for a woman with a new diagnosis of mild knee osteoarthritis (OA). The short and long-term effects of aquatic resistance training (ART) and high-impact aerobic land training (HLT) compared with the control will be estimated.

Methods: Original data sets from two previously conducted randomised controlled trials (RCT) were combined and used in a Bayesian meta-analysis. Group differences in multiple response variables were estimated. Variables included cardiorespiratory fitness, dynamic maximum leg muscle power, maximal isometric knee extension and flexion force, pain, other symptoms and quality of life. The statistical model included a latent commitment variable for each female participant.

Results: ART has 55% - 71% probability of benefits in the outcome variables and as the main effect, the intervention outperforms the control in cardiorespiratory fitness with a probability of 71% immediately after the intervention period. HLT has 46% - 63% probability of benefits after intervention with the outcome variables, but differently from ART, the positive effects of physical performance fade away during the follow-up period. Overall, the differences between groups were small and the variation in the predictions between individuals was high.

Conclusions: Both interventions had benefits but ART has a slightly higher probability of long-term benefits on physical performance. Because of high individual variation and no clear advantage of one training method over the other, personal preferences should be considered in the selection of the exercise program to ensure highest commitment to training.


Keywords: arthrosis; medical rehabilitation; exercise therapy


Contributing organizations


Related projects


Ministry reporting: No, publication in press

Preliminary JUFO rating: 1


Last updated on 2021-12-02 at 11:56