physical therapy

I Am Worried I Have Sciatica-What Do I Need to Know?

Author/s: 
Grace Y Zhang, Michael A Incze

This JAMA Internal Medicine Patient Page reviews sciatica, its symptoms, and treatment options for those who have it.

Sciatica is a type of pain that is caused by irritation of the sciatic nerve. This nerve travels from the low back down the legs. Sciatica most commonly happens when a disk in your spine gets damaged or worn out and presses on the sciatic nerve.

Effect of Physical Therapy vs Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy in People With Degenerative Meniscal Tears: Five-Year Follow-up of the ESCAPE Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
Noordyun, J. C. A., Van de Graaf, V. A., Willigenburg, N. W., Scholten-Peeters, G. G. M., Kret, E. J., Van Dijk, R. A., Buchbinder, R., Hawker, G. A., Coppieters, M. W., Poolman, R. W., ESCAPE Research Group

Importance: There is a paucity of high-quality evidence about the long-term effects (ie, 3-5 years and beyond) of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy vs exercise-based physical therapy for patients with degenerative meniscal tears.

Objectives: To compare the 5-year effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and exercise-based physical therapy on patient-reported knee function and progression of knee osteoarthritis in patients with a degenerative meniscal tear.

Design, setting, and participants: A noninferiority, multicenter randomized clinical trial was conducted in the orthopedic departments of 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 321 patients aged 45 to 70 years with a degenerative meniscal tear participated. Data collection took place between July 12, 2013, and December 4, 2020.

Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or 16 sessions of exercise-based physical therapy.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was patient-reported knee function (International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (range, 0 [worst] to 100 [best]) during 5 years of follow-up based on the intention-to-treat principle, with a noninferiority threshold of 11 points. The secondary outcome was progression in knee osteoarthritis shown on radiographic images in both treatment groups.

Results: Of 321 patients (mean [SD] age, 58 [6.6] years; 161 women [50.2%]), 278 patients (87.1%) completed the 5-year follow-up with a mean follow-up time of 61.8 months (range, 58.8-69.5 months). From baseline to 5-year follow-up, the mean (SD) improvement was 29.6 (18.7) points in the surgery group and 25.1 (17.8) points in the physical therapy group. The crude between-group difference was 3.5 points (95% CI, 0.7-6.3 points; P < .001 for noninferiority). The 95% CI did not exceed the noninferiority threshold of 11 points. Comparable rates of progression of radiographic-demonstrated knee osteoarthritis were noted between both treatments.

Conclusions and relevance: In this noninferiority randomized clinical trial after 5 years, exercise-based physical therapy remained noninferior to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for patient-reported knee function. Physical therapy should therefore be the preferred treatment over surgery for degenerative meniscal tears. These results can assist in the development and updating of current guideline recommendations about treatment for patients with a degenerative meniscal tear.

Cost-effectiveness of Physical Therapy vs Intra-articular Glucocorticoid Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Secondary Analysis From a Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
Rhon, D. I., Kim, M., Asche, C. V., Allison, S. C., Allen, C. S., Deyle, G. D.

Importance: Physical therapy and glucocorticoid injections are initial treatment options for knee osteoarthritis, but available data indicate that most patients receive one or the other, suggesting they may be competing interventions. The initial cost difference for treatment can be substantial, with physical therapy often being more expensive at the outset, and cost-effectiveness analysis can aid patients and clinicians in making decisions.

Objective: To investigate the incremental cost-effectiveness between physical therapy and intra-articular glucocorticoid injection as initial treatment strategies for knee osteoarthritis.

Design, setting, and participants: This economic evaluation is a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial performed from October 1, 2012, to May 4, 2017. Health economists were blinded to study outcomes and treatment allocation. A randomized sample of patients seen in primary care and physical therapy clinics with a radiographically confirmed diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis were evaluated from the clinical trial with 96.2% follow-up at 1 year.

Interventions: Physical therapy or glucocorticoid injection.

Main outcomes and measures: The main outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness between 2 alternative treatments. Acceptability curves of bootstrapped incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to identify the proportion of ICERs under the specific willingness-to-pay level ($50 000-$100 000). Health care system costs (total and knee related) and health-related quality-of-life based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were obtained.

Results: A total of 156 participants (mean [SD] age, 56.1 [8.7] years; 81 [51.9%] male) were randomized 1:1 and followed up for 1 year. Mean (SD) 1-year knee-related medical costs were $2113 ($4224) in the glucocorticoid injection group and $2131 ($1015) in the physical therapy group. The mean difference in QALY significantly favored physical therapy at 1 year (0.076; 95% CI, 0.02-0.126; P = .003). Physical therapy was the more cost-effective intervention, with an ICER of $8103 for knee-related medical costs, with a 99.2% probability that results fall below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000.

Conclusions and relevance: A course of physical therapy was cost-effective compared with a course of glucocorticoid injections for patients with knee osteoarthritis. These results suggest that, although the initial cost of delivering physical therapy may be higher than an initial course of glucocorticoid injections, 1-year total knee-related costs are equivalent, and greater improvement in QALYs may justify the initial higher costs.

Integrating Physical Therapists Into Primary Care Within A Large Health Care System

Author/s: 
Bodenheimer, T., Kucksdorf, J., Torn, A., Jerzak, J.

Background: Bellin Health in Wisconsin has pioneered the colocation and integration of physical therapists into primary care pods.

Methods: This is an observational study based on one in-person visit and several interviews.

Results: For patients with musculoskeletal complaints, providers make warm handoffs to the physical therapist, who is a few steps away. The physical therapist performs most of the visit, providing diagnosis, treatment, and patient education. Research studies show that-compared with physician management-appropriate patients managed by physical therapists have better outcomes, lower costs, and higher patient satisfaction. In a fee-for-service environment, the business case for this innovation requires an increased number of follow-up referrals to the physical therapy department. In the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era, physical therapists can provide video visits with equal quality compared with in-person visits.

Conclusion: The Bellin Health program is a blueprint for other primary care practices to integrate physical therapists into primary care teams.

Physical Therapy Versus Glucocorticoid Injection for Osteoarthritis of the Knee

Author/s: 
Deyle, GD, Allen, CS, Allison, SC, Gill, NW, Hando, BR, Petersen, EJ, Dusenberry, DI, Rhon, DI

Background: Both physical therapy and intraarticular injections of glucocorticoids have been shown to confer clinical benefit with respect to osteoarthritis of the knee. Whether the short-term and long-term effectiveness for relieving pain and improving physical function differ between these two therapies is uncertain.

Methods: We conducted a randomized trial to compare physical therapy with glucocorticoid injection in the primary care setting in the U.S. Military Health System. Patients with osteoarthritis in one or both knees were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a glucocorticoid injection or to undergo physical therapy. The primary outcome was the total score on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at 1 year (scores range from 0 to 240, with higher scores indicating worse pain, function, and stiffness). The secondary outcomes were the time needed to complete the Alternate Step Test, the time needed to complete the Timed Up and Go test, and the score on the Global Rating of Change scale, all assessed at 1 year.

Results: We enrolled 156 patients with a mean age of 56 years; 78 patients were assigned to each group. Baseline characteristics, including severity of pain and level of disability, were similar in the two groups. The mean (±SD) baseline WOMAC scores were 108.8±47.1 in the glucocorticoid injection group and 107.1±42.4 in the physical therapy group. At 1 year, the mean scores were 55.8±53.8 and 37.0±30.7, respectively (mean between-group difference, 18.8 points; 95% confidence interval, 5.0 to 32.6), a finding favoring physical therapy. Changes in secondary outcomes were in the same direction as those of the primary outcome. One patient fainted while receiving a glucocorticoid injection.

Conclusions: Patients with osteoarthritis of the knee who underwent physical therapy had less pain and functional disability at 1 year than patients who received an intraarticular glucocorticoid injection. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01427153.).

The effects of a home-based exercise intervention on elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis: a quasi-experimental study

Author/s: 
Chen, Hongbo, Zheng, Xiaoyan, Huang, Hongjie, Liu, Congying, Wan, Qiaoqin, Shang, Shaomei

BACKGROUND:

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is common in elderly people, causes pain, loss of physical functioning, and disability. This was a two-arm, superiority, quasi-experimental trial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a home-based exercise intervention (HBEI) to reduce KOA symptoms and improve the physical functioning of elderly patients.

METHODS:

A total of 171 elderly patients (60 years of age or older) with KOA were recruited from four community centers. Patients from two community centers were randomly assigned to the intervention group (IG) and the other two centers were randomly assigned to the control group (CG). Participants in the IG received a 12-week HBEI (including four 2-h sessions supervised by a physiotherapist and fortnightly telephone support) combined with health education, while patients in the CG only received health education. The participants and physiotherapists were aware of the group assignment and alternative treatment components, but the study's hypotheses were not disclosed to the participants. Pain intensity, joint stiffness, lower-limb muscle strength, balance, mobility, and quality of life were measured before and after the intervention by the same blinded assessor.

RESULTS:

A total of 171 patients (IG: n = 84, CG: n = 87) were enrolled. Data were obtained from 141 patients with an average age of 68 (range, 60-86 years) who completed the 12-week study (IG: n = 71, CG: n = 70). No significant group differences were found in any outcome measures at baseline. At week 12, the pretest/posttest changes 3significant between-group differences in decreases in pain intensity (- 1.60 (CI, - 2.75 to - 0.58)) and stiffness (- 0.79 (CI, - 1.37 to - 0.21)), with the IG exhibiting significantly larger improvements on both measures than the CG. The IG also showed significantly greater improvements on all the secondary outcomes than the CG did.

CONCLUSIONS:

HBEI may be effective for relieving KOA symptoms, increasing the physical functioning, and improving quality of life in community-dwelling KOA elderly patients. A large randomized controlled trial with long-term follow-up is needed to confirm these findings.

Effect of Early Surgery vs Physical Therapy on Knee Function Among Patients With Nonobstructive Meniscal Tears The ESCAPE Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
van de Graaf, Victor A., Noorduyn, Julia C., Willigenburg, Nienke W., Butter, Ise K., de Gast, Arthur, Mol, Ben W., Saris, Daniel B. F., Twisk, Jos W. R., Poolman, Rudolf W.

IMPORTANCE

Despite recent studies suggesting arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) is not more effective than physical therapy (PT), the procedure is still frequently performed in patients with meniscal tears.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether PT is noninferior to APM for improving patient-reported knee function in patients with meniscal tears.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANT

Noninferiority, multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted in 9 hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants were aged 45 to 70 years with nonobstructive meniscal tears (ie, no locking of the knee joint). Patients with knee instability, severe osteoarthritis, and body mass index greater than 35 were excluded. Recruitment took place between July 17, 2013, and November 4, 2015. Participants were followed up for 24 months (final participant follow-up, October 11, 2017).

INTERVENTIONS

Three hundred twenty-one participants were randomly assigned to APM (n = 159) or a predefined PT protocol (n = 162). The PT protocol consisted of 16 sessions of exercise therapy over 8 weeks focused on coordination and closed kinetic chain strength exercises.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in patient-reported knee function on the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (range, 0 to 100; from worse to best) from baseline over a 24-month follow-up period. The noninferiority margin was defined as a difference between treatment groups of 8 points and was assessed with a 1-sided α of .025. The primary analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

Among 321 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 58 [6.6] years; 161 women [50%]), 289 (90%) completed the trial (161 women and 158 men). In the PT group, 47 participants (29%) had APM during the 24-month follow-up period, and 8 participants randomized to APM (5%) did not have APM. Over a 24-month follow-up period, knee function improved in the APM group by 26.2 points (from 44.8 to 71.5) and in the PT group by 20.4 points (from 46.5 to 67.7). The overall between-group difference was 3.6 points (97.5% CI, − to 6.5; P value for noninferiority = .001). Adverse events occurred in 18 participants in the APM group and 12 in the PT group. Repeat surgery (3 in the APM group and 1 in the PT group) and additional outpatient visits for knee pain (6 in the APM group and 2 in the PT group) were the most frequent adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with nonobstructive meniscal tears, PT was noninferior to APM for improving patient-reported knee function over a 24-month follow-up period. Based on these results, PT may be considered an alternative to surgery for patients with nonobstructive meniscal tears.

Subscribe to physical therapy