The feasibility of a randomised control trial to assess physiotherapy against surgery for recurrent patellar instability.
Feasibility study
Knee surgery
Patellar dislocation
Patellar instability
Patellofemoral
Patient-reported outcome measures
Physiotherapy
Quality of life
Randomised controlled trial
Journal
Pilot and feasibility studies
ISSN: 2055-5784
Titre abrégé: Pilot Feasibility Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101676536
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
15
05
2020
accepted:
26
06
2020
entrez:
10
7
2020
pubmed:
10
7
2020
medline:
10
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patellar instability is a relatively common condition that leads to disability and restriction of activities. People with recurrent instability may be given the option of physiotherapy or surgery though this is largely driven by clinician preference rather than by a strong evidence base. We sought to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial comparing physiotherapy with surgical treatment for people with recurrent patellar instability. This was a pragmatic, open-label, two-arm feasibility randomised control trial (RCT) with an embedded interview component recruiting across three NHS sites comparing surgical treatment to a package of best conservative care; 'Personalised Knee Therapy' (PKT). The primary feasibility outcome was the recruitment rate per centre (expected rate 1 to 1.5 participants recruited each month). Secondary outcomes included the rate of follow-up (over 80% expected at 12 months) and a series of participant-reported outcomes taken at 3, 6 and 12 months following randomisation, including the Norwich Patellar Instability Score (NPIS), the Kujala Patellofemoral Disorder Score (KPDS), EuroQol-5D-5L, self-reported global assessment of change, satisfaction at each time point and resources use. We recruited 19 participants. Of these, 18 participants (95%) were followed-up at 12 months and 1 (5%) withdrew. One centre recruited at just over one case per month, one centre was unable to recruit, and one centre recruited at over one case per month after a change in participant screening approach. Ten participants were allocated into the PKT arm, with nine to the surgical arm. Mean Norwich Patellar Instability Score improved from 40.6 (standard deviation 22.1) to 28.2 (SD 25.4) from baseline to 12 months. This feasibility trial identified a number of challenges and required a series of changes to ensure adequate recruitment and follow-up. These changes helped achieve a sufficient recruitment and follow-up rate. The revised trial design is feasible to be conducted as a definitive trial to answer this important clinical question for people with chronic patellar instability. The trial was prospectively registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry on the 22/12/2016 (reference number: ISRCTN14950321). http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14950321.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Patellar instability is a relatively common condition that leads to disability and restriction of activities. People with recurrent instability may be given the option of physiotherapy or surgery though this is largely driven by clinician preference rather than by a strong evidence base. We sought to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial comparing physiotherapy with surgical treatment for people with recurrent patellar instability.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a pragmatic, open-label, two-arm feasibility randomised control trial (RCT) with an embedded interview component recruiting across three NHS sites comparing surgical treatment to a package of best conservative care; 'Personalised Knee Therapy' (PKT). The primary feasibility outcome was the recruitment rate per centre (expected rate 1 to 1.5 participants recruited each month). Secondary outcomes included the rate of follow-up (over 80% expected at 12 months) and a series of participant-reported outcomes taken at 3, 6 and 12 months following randomisation, including the Norwich Patellar Instability Score (NPIS), the Kujala Patellofemoral Disorder Score (KPDS), EuroQol-5D-5L, self-reported global assessment of change, satisfaction at each time point and resources use.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We recruited 19 participants. Of these, 18 participants (95%) were followed-up at 12 months and 1 (5%) withdrew. One centre recruited at just over one case per month, one centre was unable to recruit, and one centre recruited at over one case per month after a change in participant screening approach. Ten participants were allocated into the PKT arm, with nine to the surgical arm. Mean Norwich Patellar Instability Score improved from 40.6 (standard deviation 22.1) to 28.2 (SD 25.4) from baseline to 12 months.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This feasibility trial identified a number of challenges and required a series of changes to ensure adequate recruitment and follow-up. These changes helped achieve a sufficient recruitment and follow-up rate. The revised trial design is feasible to be conducted as a definitive trial to answer this important clinical question for people with chronic patellar instability.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
The trial was prospectively registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry on the 22/12/2016 (reference number: ISRCTN14950321). http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN14950321.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32642070
doi: 10.1186/s40814-020-00635-9
pii: 635
pmc: PMC7336411
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
94Investigateurs
Andrea Bailey
(A)
Robert Jones
(R)
Agnes Hunt
(A)
Andrew Barnett
(A)
David Beard
(D)
Leela Biant
(L)
Tarek Boutefnouchet
(T)
Jaclyn Brown
(J)
Damian Clark
(D)
Matt Costa
(M)
Loretta Davies
(L)
Kerri McGowan
(K)
Shilpa Patel
(S)
Claire Robertson
(C)
Joanna Teuke
(J)
Feisal Shah
(F)
Benjamin Smith
(B)
Nicholas Smith
(N)
Tim Spalding
(T)
Michael Whitehouse
(M)
Celia Wogan
(C)
David Wright
(D)
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
Physiotherapy. 2011 Dec;97(4):327-38
pubmed: 22051590
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Sep;94(9):1202-8
pubmed: 22933491
Am J Sports Med. 2013 Jul;41(7):1629-35
pubmed: 23649006
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006 Aug;14(8):707-12
pubmed: 16496126
J Pediatr Orthop. 1994 Jul-Aug;14(4):513-5
pubmed: 8077438
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Feb 26;(2):CD008106
pubmed: 25716704
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014 Feb;22(2):324-35
pubmed: 23306714
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Feb;455:93-101
pubmed: 17279039
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017 Aug;25(8):2352-2356
pubmed: 26215775
Am J Sports Med. 2004 Jul-Aug;32(5):1114-21
pubmed: 15262631
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Mar 2;98(5):417-27
pubmed: 26935465
Knee. 2019 Dec;26(6):1171-1181
pubmed: 31787447
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017 Aug;25(8):2309-2320
pubmed: 26187008
Bone Joint J. 2017 Feb;99-B(2):159-170
pubmed: 28148656
Acta Orthop Scand. 1997 Oct;68(5):419-23
pubmed: 9385238
Arthroscopy. 1993;9(2):159-63
pubmed: 8461073
Orthop J Sports Med. 2018 Jun 11;6(6):2325967118766275
pubmed: 29942814
Value Health. 2012 Jul-Aug;15(5):708-15
pubmed: 22867780
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Feb;91(2):263-73
pubmed: 19181969
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019 Jul 8;20(1):318
pubmed: 31286929
Am J Sports Med. 2000 Jul-Aug;28(4):472-9
pubmed: 10921637
Ann Rheum Dis. 1973 Sep;32(5):413-8
pubmed: 4751776
BMJ. 2000 Sep 16;321(7262):694-6
pubmed: 10987780
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014 Oct;22(10):2545-50
pubmed: 23392290
Knee Surg Relat Res. 2016 Jun;28(2):99-109
pubmed: 27274466
Orthop J Sports Med. 2014 Aug 08;2(8):2325967114544021
pubmed: 26535352
Med Care. 1997 Nov;35(11):1095-108
pubmed: 9366889
Knee. 2011 Oct;18(5):333-9
pubmed: 20719519