18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Strengthening And stretching for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand (SARAH). A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The effectiveness of exercise for improving hand and wrist function in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is uncertain.

          Objectives

          The study aims were (1) to estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding an optimised exercise programme for hands and upper limbs to standard care for patients with RA; and (2) to qualitatively describe the experience of participants in the trial with a particular emphasis on acceptability of the intervention, exercise behaviours and reasons for adherence/non-adherence.

          Design

          A pragmatic, multicentred, individually randomised controlled trial with an embedded qualitative study. Outcome assessors were blind to group assignment and independent of treatment delivery.

          Setting

          Seventeen NHS trusts in England comprising 21 rheumatology and therapy departments.

          Participants

          Adults with RA who had pain and dysfunction of the hands and/or wrists and had been on stable medication for at least 3 months. Patients were excluded if they were under 18 years old, had undergone upper limb surgery/fracture in the last 6 months, were on a waiting list for upper limb surgery or were pregnant.

          Interventions

          Usual care or usual care plus an individualised exercise programme. Usual care consisted of joint protection education, general exercise advice and functional splinting if required. The exercise programme consisted of six sessions of strengthening and stretching exercises with a hand therapist, daily home exercises and strategies to maximise adherence.

          Main outcome measures

          The primary outcome was the Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ) overall hand function subscale score at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included the full MHQ, pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-12 items), impairment (grip strength, dexterity and range of motion) and self-efficacy. European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, medication and health-care use were collected for the health economics evaluation. Follow-up was at 4 and 12 months post randomisation. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

          Results

          We randomised 490 patients (244 to usual care, 246 to exercise programme). Compliance with the treatments was very good (93% of usual care participants and 75% of exercise programme participants completed treatment). Outcomes were obtained for 89% of participants at 12 months (222 for usual care, 216 for exercise programme). There was a statistically significant difference in favour of the exercise programme for the primary outcome at 4 and 12 months [mean difference 4.6 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 7.0 points; and mean difference 4.4 points, 95% CI 1.6 to 7.1 points, respectively]. There were no significant differences in pain scores or adverse events. The estimated difference in mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) accrued over 12 months was 0.01 greater (95% CI –0.03 to 0.05) in the exercise programme group. Imputed analysis produced incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates of £17,941 (0.59 probability of cost-effectiveness at willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per QALY). The qualitative study found the exercise programme to be acceptable and highlighted the importance of the therapist in enabling patients to establish a routine and incorporate the exercises into their lives.

          Conclusions

          The results of the Strengthening And stretching for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand trial suggest that the addition of an exercise programme for RA hands/wrists to usual care is clinically effective and cost-effective when compared with usual care alone. No adverse effects were associated with the exercise programme. The economic analysis suggests that the intervention is likely to be cost-effective.

          Study registration

          Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 89936343.

          Funding details

          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. 19, No. 19. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. This report has been developed in association with the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Oxford and the NIHR Biomedical Research Unit Funding Scheme. This project benefited from facilities funded through Birmingham Science City Translational Medicine Clinical Research and Infrastructure Trials Platform, with support from Advantage West Midlands.

          Related collections

          Most cited references78

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            EuroQol: the current state of play

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12.

              The SF-12 is a multidimensional generic measure of health-related quality of life. It has become widely used in clinical trials and routine outcome assessment because of its brevity and psychometric performance, but it cannot be used in economic evaluation in its current form. We sought to derive a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12 for use in economic evaluation and to compare it with the original SF-36 preference-based index. The SF-12 was revised into a 6-dimensional health state classification (SF-6D [SF-12]) based on an item selection process designed to ensure the minimum loss of descriptive information. A sample of 241 states defined by the SF-6D (of 7500) have been valued by a representative sample of 611 members of the UK general population using the standard gamble (SG) technique. Models are estimated of the relationship between the SF-6D (SF-12) and SG values and evaluated in terms of their coefficients, overall fit, and the ability to predict SG values for all health states. The models have produced significant coefficients for levels of the SF-6D (SF-12), which are robust across model specification. The coefficients are similar to those of the SF-36 version and achieve similar levels of fit. There are concerns with some inconsistent estimates and these have been merged to produce the final recommended model. As for the SF-36 model, there is evidence of over prediction of the value of the poorest health states. The SF-12 index provides a useful tool for researchers and policy makers wishing to assess the cost-effectiveness of interventions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Technology Assessment
                National Institute for Health Research
                1366-5278
                2046-4924
                March 2015
                March 2015
                : 19
                : 19
                : 1-222
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
                [2 ]Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
                [3 ]Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
                [4 ]University College London, London, UK
                [5 ]Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
                Article
                10.3310/hta19190
                1a3e1f55-357e-44bc-a694-ae434efd16c9
                © 2015
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content99

                Cited by21

                Most referenced authors704