ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01230424.

ObjectivesTo determine the effectiveness of tai chi interventions compared with aerobic exercise, a current core standard treatment in patients with fibromyalgia, and to test whether the effectiveness of tai chi depends on its dosage or duration.DesignProspective, randomized, 52 week, single blind comparative effectiveness trial.SettingUrban tertiary care academic hospital in the United States between March 2012 and September 2016.Participants226 adults with fibromyalgia (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology 1990 and 2010 criteria) were included in the intention to treat analyses: 151 were assigned to one of four tai chi groups and 75 to an aerobic exercise group.InterventionsParticipants were randomly assigned to either supervised aerobic exercise (24 weeks, twice weekly) or one of four classic Yang style supervised tai chi interventions (12 or 24 weeks, once or twice weekly). Participants were followed for 52 weeks. Adherence was rigorously encouraged in person and by telephone.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was change in the revised fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQR) scores at 24 weeks compared with baseline. Secondary outcomes included changes of scores in patient’s global assessment, anxiety, depression, self efficacy, coping strategies, physical functional performance, functional limitation, sleep, and health related quality of life.ResultsFIQR scores improved in all five treatment groups, but the combined tai chi groups improved statistically significantly more than the aerobic exercise group in FIQR scores at 24 weeks (difference between groups=5.5 points, 95% confidence interval 0.6 to 10.4, P=0.03) and several secondary outcomes (patient’s global assessment=0.9 points, 0.3 to 1.4, P=0.005; anxiety=1.2 points, 0.3 to 2.1, P=0.006; self efficacy=1.0 points, 0.5 to 1.6, P=0.0004; and coping strategies, 2.6 points, 0.8 to 4.3, P=0.005). Tai chi treatment compared with aerobic exercise administered with the same intensity and duration (24 weeks, twice weekly) had greater benefit (between group difference in FIQR scores=16.2 points, 8.7 to 23.6, P<0.001). The groups who received tai chi for 24 weeks showed greater improvements than those who received it for 12 weeks (difference in FIQR scores=9.6 points, 2.6 to 16.6, P=0.007). There was no significant increase in benefit for groups who received tai chi twice weekly compared with once weekly. Participants attended the tai chi training sessions more often than participants attended aerobic exercise. The effects of tai chi were consistent across all instructors. No serious adverse events related to the interventions were reported.ConclusionTai chi mind-body treatment results in similar or greater improvement in symptoms than aerobic exercise, the current most commonly prescribed non-drug treatment, for a variety of outcomes for patients with fibromyalgia. Longer duration of tai chi showed greater improvement. This mind-body approach may be considered a therapeutic option in the multidisciplinary management of fibromyalgia.Tr...

The goal of this document is to update the original OARSI recommendations specifically for the design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials that target symptom or structure modification among individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA). To develop recommendations for the design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials for knee OA we initially drafted recommendations through an iterative process. Members of the working group included representatives from industry and academia. After the working group members reviewed a final draft, they scored the appropriateness for recommendations. After the members voted we calculated the median score among the nine members of the working group who completed the score. The document includes 25 recommendations regarding randomization, blocking and stratification, blinding, enhancing accuracy of patient-reported outcomes (PRO), selecting a study population and index knee, describing interventions, patient-reported and physical performance measures, structural outcome measures, biochemical biomarkers, and reporting recommendations. In summary, the working group identified 25 recommendations that represent the current best practices regarding clinical trials that target symptom or structure modification among individuals with knee OA. These updated recommendations incorporate novel technologies (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)) and strategies to address the heterogeneity of knee OA.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments can provide valid, interpretable measures of health status among adults with osteoarthritis (OA). However, their ability to detect meaningful change over time is unknown. We evaluated the responsiveness and minimally important differences (MID) for four PROMIS Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety. We analyzed adults with symptomatic knee OA from our randomized trial comparing Tai Chi and physical therapy. Using baseline and 12-week scores, responsiveness was evaluated according to consensus standards by testing 6 a priori hypotheses of the correlations between PROMIS and legacy change scores. Responsiveness was considered high if ≥5 hypotheses were confirmed, and moderate if 3 or 4 were confirmed. MIDs were evaluated according to prospective change for people achieving previously-established MID on legacy comparators. The lowest and highest MIDs meeting a priori quality criteria formed an MID range for each PROMIS Short Form. Among 165 predominantly female (70%) and white (57%) participants, mean age was 61 years and body mass index was 33kg/m2. PROMIS Physical Function had 5 confirmed hypotheses and Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety had 3 or 4. MID ranges were: Depression=3.0–3.1; Anxiety=2.3–3.4; Physical Function=1.9–2.2; and Pain Interference=2.35–2.4. PROMIS Physical Function has high responsiveness, and Depression, Anxiety, and Pain Interference have moderate responsiveness among adults with knee OA. We established the first MIDs for PROMIS in this population, and provided an important standard of reference to better apply or interpret PROMIS in future trials or clinical practice.

Background Few remedies effectively treat long-term pain and disability from knee osteoarthritis. Studies suggest that Tai Chi alleviates symptoms, but no trials have directly compared Tai Chi with standard therapies for osteoarthritis. Objective To compare Tai Chi with standard physical therapy for patients with knee osteoarthritis. Design Randomized, 52-week, single-blind comparative effectiveness trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01258985) Setting An urban tertiary care academic hospital. Patients 204 participants with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (mean age, 60 years; 70% women; 53% white). Intervention Tai Chi (2 times per week for 12 weeks) or standard physical therapy (2 times per week for 6 weeks, followed by 6 weeks of monitored home exercise). Measurements The primary outcome was Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included physical function, depression, medication use, and quality of life. Results At 12 weeks, the WOMAC score was substantially reduced in both groups (Tai Chi, 167 points [95% CI, 145 to 190 points]; physical therapy, 143 points [CI, 119 to 167 points]). The between-group difference was not significant (24 points [CI, −10 to 58 points]). Both groups also showed similar clinically significant improvement in most secondary outcomes, and the benefits were maintained up to 52 weeks. Of note, the Tai Chi group had significantly greater improvements in depression and the physical component of quality of life. The benefit of Tai Chi was consistent across instructors. No serious adverse events occurred. Limitation Patients were aware of their treatment group assignment, and the generalizability of the findings to other settings remains undetermined. Conclusion Tai Chi produced beneficial effects similar to those of a standard course of physical therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Primary Funding Source National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health of the National Institutes of Health.

Objective We aimed to evaluate if a recent knee injury was associated with accelerated knee osteoarthritis (KOA) progression. Methods In the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) we studied participants free of KOA on their baseline radiographs (Kellgren-Lawrence [KL]<2). We compared three groups: 1) individuals with accelerated progression of KOA: defined as having at least one knee that progressed to end-stage KOA (KL Grade 3 or 4) within 48 months, 2) common KOA progression: at least one knee increased in radiographic scoring within 48 months (excluding those defined as accelerated KOA), and 3) no KOA: no change in KL grade in either knee. At baseline, participants were asked if their knees had ever been injured and at each annual visit they were asked about injuries during the prior 12 months. We used multinomial logistic regressions to determine if a new knee injury was associated with the outcome of accelerated KOA or common KOA progression after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, static knee malalignment, and systolic blood pressure. Results A knee injury during the total observation period was associated with accelerated KOA progression (n=54, odds ratio [OR]=3.14) but not common KOA progression (n=187, OR=1.08). Furthermore, a more recent knee injury (within a year of the outcome) was associated with accelerated (OR=8.46) and common KOA progression (OR=3.12). Conclusion Recent knee injuries are associated with accelerated KOA. Most concerning is that certain injuries may be associated with a rapid cascade towards joint failure in less than one year.

Female soccer players exhibited greater head accelerations than their male counterparts when wearing headgear. Our results are important clinically because they indicate that soccer headgear may not be an appropriate head injury prevention tool for all athletes.

Participants in soccer (elite and nonelite), elite-level long-distance running, competitive weight lifting, and wrestling had an increased prevalence of knee OA and should be targeted for risk-reduction strategies.