Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Does an early home-based progressive resistance training program improve function following total hip replacement? Results of a randomized controlled study
Okoro T, Whitaker R, Gardner A, Maddison P, Andrew JG, Lemmey A
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2016 Apr 21;17(173):Epub
clinical trial
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: In-hospital progressive resistance training (PRT) has been shown to be an effective method of rehabilitation following hip surgery. The aim of this study was to assess whether a home-based PRT program would be beneficial in improving patients' muscle strength and physical function compared to standard rehabilitation. METHODS: Subjects (n = 49) either received home-based PRT rehabilitation (n = 25) or standard rehabilitation (n = 24) in a prospective single blinded randomized trial carried out over a two-year period. The primary outcome measure was the maximal voluntary contraction of the operated leg quadriceps (MVCOLQ) with secondary measures of outcome being the sit to stand score (ST), timed up and go (TUG), stair climb performance (SCP), the 6 min walk test (6MWT), and lean mass of the operated leg (LM). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients completed follow up at 1 year (n = 13 per group) for the final comparative analysis. All the outcome measures showed marked progressive improvements from the baseline measures at 9 to 12 months post op (estimated effect (std error); p value -- MVCOLQ 26.50 (8.71) N p = 0.001; ST 1.37 (0.33) p = 0.0001; TUG -1.44 (0.45) s p = 0.0001; SCP -3.41 (0.80) s p = 0.0001; 6MWT 45.61 (6.10) m p = 0.0001; LM 20 (204) g p = 0.326) following surgery for both groups. Overall, there was no significant effect for participation in the exercise regime compared with standard care for all outcomes assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study demonstrated that there is no significant difference between the two groups for participation in the home-based PRT exercise programme when compared to standard care for all outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN1309951. Registered February 2011.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help