Group Versus Individual Physical Therapy for Veterans With Knee Osteoarthritis: Randomized Clinical Trial.

dc.contributor.author

Allen, Kelli D

dc.contributor.author

Bongiorni, Dennis

dc.contributor.author

Bosworth, Hayden B

dc.contributor.author

Coffman, Cynthia J

dc.contributor.author

Datta, Santanu K

dc.contributor.author

Edelman, David

dc.contributor.author

Hall, Katherine S

dc.contributor.author

Lindquist, Jennifer H

dc.contributor.author

Oddone, Eugene Z

dc.contributor.author

Hoenig, Helen

dc.date.accessioned

2024-01-31T20:24:29Z

dc.date.available

2024-01-31T20:24:29Z

dc.date.issued

2016-05

dc.description.abstract

Background

Efficient approaches are needed for delivering nonpharmacological interventions for management of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Objective

This trial compared group-based versus individual physical therapy interventions for management of knee OA.

Design and methods

Three hundred twenty patients with knee OA at the VA Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina, (mean age=60 years, 88% male, 58% nonwhite) were randomly assigned to receive either the group intervention (group physical therapy; six 1-hour sessions, typically 8 participants per group) or the individual intervention (individual physical therapy; two 1-hour sessions). Both programs included instruction in home exercise, joint protection techniques, and individual physical therapist evaluation. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC; range=0-96, higher scores indicate worse symptoms), measured at baseline, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks. The secondary outcome measure was the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; range=0-12, higher scores indicate better performance), measured at baseline and 12 weeks. Linear mixed models assessed the difference in WOMAC scores between arms.

Results

At 12 weeks, WOMAC scores were 2.7 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% confidence interval [CI]=-5.9, 0.5; P=.10), indicating no between-group difference. At 24 weeks, WOMAC scores were 1.3 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% CI=-4.6, 2.0; P=.44), indicating no significant between-group difference. At 12 weeks, SPPB scores were 0.1 points lower in the group physical therapy arm compared with the individual physical therapy arm (95% CI=-0.5, 0.2; P=.53), indicating no difference between groups.

Limitations

This study was conducted in one VA medical center. Outcome assessors were blinded, but participants and physical therapists were not blinded.

Conclusions

Group physical therapy was not more effective than individual physical therapy for primary and secondary study outcomes. Either group physical therapy or individual physical therapy may be a reasonable delivery model for health care systems to consider.
dc.identifier

ptj.20150194

dc.identifier.issn

0031-9023

dc.identifier.issn

1538-6724

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/29942

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

dc.relation.ispartof

Physical therapy

dc.relation.isversionof

10.2522/ptj.20150194

dc.rights.uri

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

dc.subject

Humans

dc.subject

Osteoarthritis, Knee

dc.subject

Exercise Test

dc.subject

Treatment Outcome

dc.subject

Exercise Therapy

dc.subject

Severity of Illness Index

dc.subject

Single-Blind Method

dc.subject

Peer Group

dc.subject

Aged

dc.subject

Middle Aged

dc.subject

United States

dc.subject

Female

dc.subject

Male

dc.subject

Veterans Health

dc.title

Group Versus Individual Physical Therapy for Veterans With Knee Osteoarthritis: Randomized Clinical Trial.

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Bosworth, Hayden B|0000-0001-6188-9825

duke.contributor.orcid

Coffman, Cynthia J|0000-0002-4554-1463

duke.contributor.orcid

Edelman, David|0000-0001-7112-6151

duke.contributor.orcid

Hall, Katherine S|0000-0002-9834-2011

duke.contributor.orcid

Hoenig, Helen|0000-0002-6682-2627

pubs.begin-page

597

pubs.end-page

608

pubs.issue

5

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Faculty

pubs.organisational-group

Basic Science Departments

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.organisational-group

Institutes and Centers

pubs.organisational-group

Biostatistics & Bioinformatics

pubs.organisational-group

Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences

pubs.organisational-group

Medicine, General Internal Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Medicine, Geriatrics

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Cancer Institute

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Clinical Research Institute

pubs.organisational-group

Institutes and Provost's Academic Units

pubs.organisational-group

Center for the Study of Aging and Human Development

pubs.organisational-group

Initiatives

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Science & Society

pubs.organisational-group

Population Health Sciences

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Innovation & Entrepreneurship

pubs.organisational-group

Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Behavioral Medicine & Neurosciences

pubs.organisational-group

Duke - Margolis Center For Health Policy

pubs.organisational-group

Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Division of Biostatistics

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

96

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ptj0597.pdf
Size:
781.66 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format