Outpatient physiotherapy versus home-based rehabilitation for patients at risk of poor outcomes after knee arthroplasty: CORKA RCT
- PMID: 33250068
- PMCID: PMC7750865
- DOI: 10.3310/hta24650
Outpatient physiotherapy versus home-based rehabilitation for patients at risk of poor outcomes after knee arthroplasty: CORKA RCT
Abstract
Background: Over 100,000 primary knee arthroplasty operations are undertaken annually in the UK. Around 15-30% of patients do not report a good outcome. Better rehabilitation strategies may improve patient-reported outcomes.
Objectives: To compare the outcomes from a traditional outpatient physiotherapy model with those from a home-based rehabilitation programme for people assessed as being at risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty.
Design: An individually randomised, two-arm controlled trial with a blinded outcome assessment, a parallel health economic evaluation and a nested qualitative study.
Setting: The trial took place in 14 NHS physiotherapy departments.
Participants: People identified as being at high risk of a poor outcome after knee arthroplasty.
Interventions: A multicomponent home-based rehabilitation package delivered by rehabilitation assistants with supervision from qualified therapists compared with usual-care outpatient physiotherapy.
Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the Late Life Function and Disability Instrument at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the Oxford Knee Score (a disease-specific measure of function); Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; Quality of Life subscale; Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly; EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version; and physical function assessed using the Figure-of-8 Walk Test, 30-Second Chair Stand Test and Single Leg Stance. Data on the use of health-care services, time off work and informal care were collected using participant diaries.
Results: In total, 621 participants were randomised. A total of 309 participants were assigned to the COmmunity based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA) home-based rehabilitation programme, receiving a median of five treatment sessions (interquartile range 4-7 sessions). A total of 312 participants were assigned to usual care, receiving a median of four sessions (interquartile range 2-6 sessions). The primary outcome, Late Life Function and Disability Instrument function total score at 12 months, was collected for 279 participants (89%) in the home-based CORKA group and 287 participants (92%) in the usual-care group. No clinically or statistically significant difference was found between the groups (intention-to-treat adjusted difference 0.49 points, 95% confidence interval -0.89 to 1.88 points; p = 0.48). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in any of the patient-reported or physical secondary outcome measures at 6 or 12 months post randomisation. The health economic analysis found that the CORKA intervention was cheaper to provide than usual care (£66 less per participant). Total societal costs (combining health-care costs and other costs) were lower for the CORKA intervention than usual care (£316 less per participant). Adopting a societal perspective, CORKA had a 75% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Adopting the narrower health and social care perspective, CORKA had a 43% probability of being cost-effective at the same threshold.
Limitations: The interventions were of short duration and were set within current commissioning guidance for UK physiotherapy. Participants and treating therapists could not be blinded.
Conclusions: This randomised controlled trial found no important differences in outcomes when post-arthroplasty rehabilitation was delivered using a home-based, rehabilitation assistant-delivered rehabilitation package or a traditional outpatient model. However, the health economic evaluation found that when adopting a societal perspective, the CORKA home-based intervention was cost-saving and more effective than, and thus dominant over, usual care, owing to reduced time away from paid employment for this group. Further research could look at identifying the risk of poor outcome and further evaluation of a cost-effective treatment, including the workforce model to deliver it.
Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13517704.
Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 65. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Keywords: COMMUNITY; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; PHYSIOTHERAPY; REHABILITATION.
Plain language summary
Knee replacement is a common treatment for knee osteoarthritis. Most people do well after surgery; however, a small group of people do not report a good outcome. One way we could try to improve this is by considering the way that rehabilitation is offered after surgery. We identified people thought to be at risk of a poor outcome after knee replacement. We compared a newly designed rehabilitation programme that was undertaken in people’s own homes with physiotherapy as it is currently offered. This new programme was delivered by rehabilitation assistants under the guidance of qualified therapists. We assessed these treatments by measuring three functional tests: walking in a figure of eight, sitting and standing from a chair in 30 seconds and standing on one leg. In addition, we asked people to complete questionnaires about their knee, what activities they could perform, how physically active they were and their quality of life. We also recorded the use of health-care services, time off work and any informal care that people received. The results showed that both groups had improved by a similar amount at 6 months and 12 months after surgery. The new rehabilitation programme that was designed for the study was cheaper to deliver than standard physiotherapy, when all costs were considered. We think that future research should look at developing better tools to predict who might be at risk of not doing well after surgery, and to determine the ideal make-up of the rehabilitation team that delivers treatment after knee replacement.
Similar articles
-
Home-based rehabilitation programme compared with traditional physiotherapy for patients at risk of poor outcome after knee arthroplasty: the CORKA randomised controlled trial.BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 27;11(8):e052598. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052598. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 34452970 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Exercise- and strategy-based physiotherapy-delivered intervention for preventing repeat falls in people with Parkinson's: the PDSAFE RCT.Health Technol Assess. 2019 Jul;23(36):1-150. doi: 10.3310/hta23360. Health Technol Assess. 2019. PMID: 31339100 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Exercise to prevent shoulder problems after breast cancer surgery: the PROSPER RCT.Health Technol Assess. 2022 Feb;26(15):1-124. doi: 10.3310/JKNZ2003. Health Technol Assess. 2022. PMID: 35220995 Clinical Trial.
-
Better post-operative prediction and management of chronic pain in adults after total knee replacement: the multidisciplinary STAR research programme including RCT.Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; 2023 Jun. Southampton (UK): National Institute for Health and Care Research; 2023 Jun. PMID: 37494508 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
A facilitated home-based cardiac rehabilitation intervention for people with heart failure and their caregivers: a research programme including the REACH-HF RCT.Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2021 Feb. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2021 Feb. PMID: 33617178 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
Continued stepped care model improves early-stage self-report quality of life and knee function after total knee arthroplasty.Technol Health Care. 2024;32(6):4593-4601. doi: 10.3233/THC-240780. Technol Health Care. 2024. PMID: 39031415 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effects of psychological distress on the general health to self-reported pain and function outcome relationship in knee arthroplasty: A causal mediation study.Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2022 Oct 15;4(4):100315. doi: 10.1016/j.ocarto.2022.100315. eCollection 2022 Dec. Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2022. PMID: 36474788 Free PMC article.
-
Effectiveness and therapeutic validity of physiotherapeutic exercise starting within one year following total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a systematic review.Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2023 Mar 29;20(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s11556-023-00317-4. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2023. PMID: 36991323 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The challenges and gains of delivering a home-exercise intervention: a qualitative study of physiotherapists and physiotherapy assistants.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Sep 3;23(1):839. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05790-z. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022. PMID: 36057590 Free PMC article.
-
Phase 3 Trials of Enhanced Versus Usual Care Physical Therapy for Patients at Risk of Poor Outcome Following Knee Arthroplasty: A Perspective on Meaning and a Way Forward.Phys Ther. 2021 Nov 1;101(11):pzab186. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzab186. Phys Ther. 2021. PMID: 34331766 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
References
-
- National Institute for Health Research. Funding Awards. COmmunity based Rehabilitation after Knee Arthroplasty (CORKA). URL: www.fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/12/196/08 (accessed 22 April 2020).
-
- Martin J, Meltzer H, Elliot D. OPCS Surveys of Disability in Great Britain. Report 1. The Prevalence of Disability Among Adults. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office; 1988.
-
- Arthritis V. The State of Musculoskeletal Health 2019. URL: www.versusarthritis.org/about-arthritis/data-and-statistics/state-of-mus... (accessed 22 April 2020).
-
- National Joint Registry. 15th Annual Report 2018. URL: www.njrreports.org.uk/Portals/0/PDFdownloads/NJR%2015th%20Annual%20R10ep... (accessed 22 April 2020).
-
- Clement ND, MacDonald D, Howie CR, Biant LC. The outcome of primary total hip and knee arthroplasty in patients aged 80 years or more. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:1265–70. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.93B9.25962 doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B9.25962. - DOI - PubMed