Introduction. Exercise is recommended as first-line treatment for patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). Interestingly, content and dose of exercise interventions seem to be important for the effect of exercise interventions, but the optimal content and dose is unknown. This warrants randomized controlled trials providing evidence for the optimal exercise program in Hip OA. The aim of this trial was to investigate whether progressive resistance training (PRT) is superior to neuromuscular exercise (NEMEX) for improving functional performance, hip pain and hip-related quality of life in patients with hip OA. Method. This was a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, superiority trial. 160 participants with clinically diagnosed hip OA were recruited from hospitals and physiotherapy clinics and randomly assigned to twelve weeks of PRT or NEMEX. The PRT intervention consisted of 5 high-intensity resistance training exercises targeting muscles at the hip and knee joints. The NEMEX intervention included 10 exercises and emphasized sensorimotor control and functional stability. The primary outcome was change in the 30-second chair stand test (30s-CST). Key secondary outcomes were changes in scores on the pain and hip-related quality of life (QoL) subscales of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Result. The mean changes from baseline to 12-week follow-up in the 30s-CST were 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with PRT and 1.5 (CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with NEMEX (difference, 0.0 [CI, 0.8 to 0.8] chair stands). For the HOOS pain subscale, mean changes were 8.6 (CI, 5.3 to 11.8) points with PRT and 9.3 (CI, 5.9 to 12.6) points with NEMEX. For the HOOS QoL subscale, mean changes were 8.0 (CI, 4.3 to 11.7) points with PRT and 5.7 (CI, 1.9 to 9.5) points with NEMEX. Conclusion. In patients with hip OA, PRT is not superior to NEMEX for improving functional performance, hip pain, or hip-related QoL

Introduction. Progressive resistance training (PRT) as a mean to reduce symptoms in patients with hip dysplasia (HD) has not yet been tried out. The aim of this study was to examine if PRT is feasible in patients with HD. A secondary purpose was to report data on changes of patient reported outcomes, muscle performance and hip muscle strength following PRT. Materials and methods. Patients diagnosed with HD on the waiting list for a periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) were offered to participate in a PRT feasibility study. The PRT intervention consisted of 8-weeks of supervised PRT consisting of 20 training sessions with exercises for the hips and knees. Feasibility was evaluated as adherence, the number of dropouts and adverse events. Furthermore, pain was reported after each exercise and one day after a training session using a 100mm visual analog scale (VAS). Pain was categorized as “safe” (VAS ≤20), “acceptable” (VAS >20–50) and “high risk” (VAS >50). Pre- and post the intervention patients completed the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS), performed two hop-tests on each leg and had their peak torque of the hip extensors and flexors assessed by isokinetic dynamometry. Results. 16 patients, mean age 28 (range 22–40) years, completed the PRT intervention. Adherence was high (90.3% ±9.0%). Acceptable pain levels (VAS ≤50) were reported on average of 95% during the completed PRT sessions and after 92.3% of the sessions when assessed on the following day. Four out of six HAGOS subscales improved (P <0.05) after the intervention, as did standing distance jump and countermovement jump (8.3 cm 95% CI [1.2, 15.3], 1.8 cm [0.7, 2.9]) on the affected side. Dynamometry showed significant improved peak torque during isokinetic concentric hip flexion (15.8 Nm 95% CI [5.9, 25.8]) on the affected side. A similar improvement was seen during isometric hip flexion on the non-affected side. Conclusion. Supervised preoperative PRT is feasible in terms of drop outs, adherence, adverse events and pain levels in patients with HD scheduled for PAO. Furthermore, this feasibility study suggests that PRT may improve pain levels, patient reported outcomes, functional performance and hip flexion muscle strength

Introduction and Objective. Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is the leading cause for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although, being considered as the surgery of the century up to 23% of the patients report long-term pain and deficits in physical function and muscle strength may persist after THA. Progressive resistance training (PRT) appear to improve several outcomes moderately in patients with hip OA. Current treatment selection is based on low-level evidence as no randomised controlled trials have compared THA to non-surgical treatment. The primary objective of this trial is to determine the effectiveness of THA followed by standard care compared to 12 weeks of supervised PRT followed by 12 weeks of optional unsupervised PRT, on changes in hip pain and function, in patients with severe hip OA after 6 months. Materials and Methods. This is a protocol for a multicentre, parallel-group, assessor blinded, randomised controlled superiority trial. Patients aged ≥50 years with clinical and radiographic hip OA found eligible for THA by an orthopaedic surgeon will be randomised to THA or PRT (allocation 1:1). The primary outcome will be change in patient-reported hip pain and function, measured using the Oxford Hip Score. Key secondary outcomes will be change in the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, University of California Los Angeles Activity Score, 40-meter fast-paced walk test, 30-second chair stand test, and number of serious adverse events. Results. The trial has been approved by The Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark (Project-ID: S-20180158) in February 2019 and registration was performed at . ClinicalTrials.gov. (NCT04070027) in August 2019. Recruitment was initiated on the 2. nd. of September 2019 and the final deadline will be on the 30. th. of June 2021, or when a sample size of 120 patients has been accomplished. Conclusions. The results of the current trial are expected to enable evidence-based recommendations, which may be used to facilitate the shared-decision making process in the discussion of treatment strategy for the individual patient with severe hip OA. All results will be presented in peer-reviewed scientific journals and international conferences

Introduction. Late (commenced 6 months to 4 years post-op) home-based progressive resistance training programs are proven to improve muscle strength and function after total hip replacement (THR). This study assessed whether early (commenced < 1 week post-op) HBPRT post-THR improves muscle mass, strength and function relative to routine physiotherapy rehabilitation (RPR) at up to 12 months follow up. Methods. Prospective single blind randomized controlled study performed after ethical approval. 50 patients randomised to 6 week HBPRT (n=26) or RPR (n=24) postoperatively. Maximal voluntary contraction of the operated leg quadriceps in (MVCOLQ) in Newtons (N), sit to stands in 30 seconds (ST, number of repetitions), and the lean mass in grams of the operated leg (LM) were assessed preoperatively and at intervals up to 12 months postoperatively. Mixed model repeated measures ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. Results. With loss to follow up, 35 patients; HBPRT n=20 (males n=9, females n=11) and RPR n=15 (males n=6, females n=9); were analyzed preoperatively with 26 patients (HBPRT n=13, RPR n=13) completing 12 month follow up. There was no effect in the mixed model repeated measures ANOVA for randomization into either HBPRT or RPR for MVCOLQ (F=0.065, p=0.800), ST (F=0.255, p=0.617) or LM (F=0.849, p=0.364). Statistically significant improvement over time was obtained for MCVOLQ (F=21.519, p=0.002) and ST (F=41.895, p=0.003) but LM remained unchanged (F=0.003, p=0.954). Conclusions. Early HBPRT has no additional benefit when compared to RPR post-THR. Additional functional gain post-THR is possible with HBPRT only when it is applied late

7–20 % of the patients with a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are dissatisfied without an indication for revision. Therapeutic options for this patient population with mostly a lack of quadriceps strength are limited. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of six weeks low load resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) on the clinical outcome in these unhappy TKA patients. Thirty-one unhappy TKA patients (of the scheduled fifty patients) without mechanical failure were included in this prospective study since 2022. The patients participate in a supervised resistance training combined with BFR, two times a week during nine weeks. Patients were evaluated by the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Society Score: satisfaction (KSSs) and the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Functionality was tested using the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and the 30-Second Chair Stand Test (30CST). Follow-up took place at six weeks, three months and six months after the start. Six weeks training with BFR provided statistically significant improvements in all the KOOS subscales compared to the baseline, especially for symptoms (55.1 (±15.4) versus 48.0 (±16.5); p<0.001), activities in daily living (50.3 (±21.1) versus 43.7 (±17.2); p<0.00) and quality of life (24.6 (±18.5) versus 17.3 (±13.0); p<0.001). The PCS reduced from 27.4 (±11.0) to 23.2 (±11.4) at six weeks (p<0.01), whereas the KSSs increased from 11.8 (±6.5) to 14.9 (±7.6) (p=0.021). Both the 6MWT and the 30CST improved statistically significant from respectively 319.7 (±15.0) to 341.6m (±106.5) (p<0.01) and 8.6 (±3.9) to 9.3 times (±4.5) (p<0.01). Blood flow restriction appears to enhance the quality of life and functional performance of unhappy TKA patients. Based on these preliminary results, BFR seems to be a promising and valuable alternative for these TKA patients with limited therapeutic options

As high incidences of tendinopathies are observed particularly in those who intensively use their tendons, we assume that pathological changes are caused, at least partially, by mechanical overload. This has led to the so-called overload hypothesis, explaining the development of tendinopathies by structural failure resulting from excessive load. At the same time, tendon loading is an important part in tendon rehabilitation. Currently, exercise treatment approaches such as eccentric training or heavy load resistance training are widely applied in tendinopathy rehabilitation, with good clinical results such as an improvement in function and a reduction in pain. Particularly those rehabilitative approaches which impose high strains on the tendon may induce an adaptation of the tendon's mechanical properties such as increased tendon stiffness. An increased tendon stiffness is often interpreted as desirable, as it may protect the tendon from overloading and thus prevent future strain injuries. However, the tendinopathic tendon is not necessarily less stiff than the tendon in the contralateral leg and an improvement in tendon stiffness is not necessarily accompanied by an improvement in tendon pain or function. In addition, metabolic factors, resulting e.g. in low-level systemic inflammation, may contribute to pathological tendon tissue changes and are not necessarily affected by an exercise program, while nutritional interventions or dietary supplements may potentially affect tendon cell metabolism. Indeed, dietary supplements have been introduced as an additional therapeutic approach in the treatment of tendinopathies in recent years, and their positive curative effects have been reported for both the general population and athletes. In the management of tendinopathies, it may thus be advisable if therapeutic approaches aim to address both tendon mechanics and tendon metabolism for better treatment effectiveness and a sustainable improvement in pain and function