IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i24p17088-d1008294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of a Group-/Home-Based and a Weight-Machine-Based Exercise Training for Patients with Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis—A Secondary Analysis of Two Trial Interventions in a Real-World Context

Author

Listed:
  • Inka Roesel

    (Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biostatistics, University Hospital of Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
    Department of Sports Medicine, University Hospital, Medical Clinic, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Inga Krauss

    (Department of Sports Medicine, University Hospital, Medical Clinic, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany
    Interfaculty Research Institute for Sports and Physical Activity Tuebingen, 72074 Tuebingen, Germany
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Peter Martus

    (Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biostatistics, University Hospital of Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany)

  • Benjamin Steinhilber

    (Institute for Occupational and Social Medicine and Health Services Research, University Hospital of Tuebingen, 72074 Tuebingen, Germany)

  • Gerhard Mueller

    (Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse AOK Baden-Wuerttemberg, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany)

Abstract

This study aimed to compare an individual weight-machine-based strengthening program (MbT) with a group-/homebased training offering strengthening/functional exercises (GHT) in a general health care setting. A total of 657 participants (GHT = 521, MbT = 136) suffering from hip/knee OA were included and analysed with a pre–post design (baseline (T0)/3-months (T1)). Primary outcomes were pain and physical functioning (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, range 0–10). Additionally, adherence and perceived patient benefit were measured (T1). Data were analysed with linear mixed models (time, treatment, baseline pain/physical impairment severity) adjusted for patient characteristics. No significant between-group differences in pain reduction/functional improvements (time*treatment*baseline pain/physical impairment severity, pain/function: n.s.; time*treatment, pain: p = 0.884, function: p = 0.067). Within-group improvements were dependent on baseline severity: Higher severity levels demonstrated larger changes from baseline. Perceived patient-benefit (very high to high, GHT: 78%, MbT: 92%) and exercise adherence (Dropouts T1: GHT: 27.8%, MbT: 16.2%; adherence to supervised sessions: GHT: 89%, MbT: 92%) was slightly better in the MbT. In summary, both MbT and GHT, showed positive results for patients with at least moderate disease symptoms. Findings for physical functioning, perceived patient-benefit, exercise adherence hint towards a superiority of MbT. Individual preferences should be considered when prescribing exercise therapy. Trial registration: (1) German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00009251. Registered 10 September 2015. (2) German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00009257. Registered 11 September 2015.

Suggested Citation

  • Inka Roesel & Inga Krauss & Peter Martus & Benjamin Steinhilber & Gerhard Mueller, 2022. "Comparison of a Group-/Home-Based and a Weight-Machine-Based Exercise Training for Patients with Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis—A Secondary Analysis of Two Trial Interventions in a Real-World Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-14, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:17088-:d:1008294
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/17088/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/17088/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:17088-:d:1008294. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.