Effects of Pressure Biofeedback Training Versus Bolster Foam Roll Training for Pain, Muscle Activation and Quality of Life Among Knee Osteoarthritis Patients
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 招募中
- 发起方
- 入组人数
- 48
- 试验地点
- 1
- 主要终点
- Pain Intensity assessed via Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
研究概览
简要总结
The current study will be a single-blinded, two-arm parallel group randomized clinical trial involving 48 participants. The trial will compare Pressure Biofeedback training with Bolster Foam Roll training. Interventions will be delivered three times per week for eight weeks. The primary outcomes will include pain intensity, functional status, and muscle activation. Assessments will be conducted at baseline (week 0), mid-intervention (week 4), post-intervention (week 8), and follow-up (week 12). The study will be conducted at the outpatient departments of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital (SGRH) and Mayo Hospital Lahore. The hypothesis is that there is a difference between Pressure Biofeedback Training and Bolster Foam Feedback Training regarding pain reduction, muscle activation, and patient-reported quality of life compared to Bolster Foam rolling training among knee osteoarthritis patients.
详细描述
Knee Osteoarthritis is a common degenerative joint disease that causes pain, disability, and reduced quality of life. Grade II knee OA represents a mild but symptomatic stage where targeted rehabilitation can help slow disease progression and improve joint function. A major challenge in these patients is Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition (AMI), which limits rehabilitation progress by reducing the normal activation of the quadriceps muscles due to pain and swelling. This leads to noticeable muscle weakness and difficulty performing functional movements.To counteract AMI, rehabilitation protocols integrate biofeedback mechanisms to enhance motor learning. A foam bolster is normally used to provide tactile feedback, while a Pressure Biofeedback Unit (PBU) provides a visual target to help patients activate their muscles better. This study will evaluate whether the addition of a quantifiable visual target (PBU) offers superior clinical efficacy over traditional tactile-based Bolster Foam feedback.A total of 48 participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either Group A (Pressure Biofeedback) or Group B (Bolster Foam Feedback). Both groups will undergo 3 supervised sessions per week for 8 weeks. Each session will last 45 minutes and include a standard baseline conventional exercise protocol. The groups will differ during the targeted isometric intervention phase, using either a PBU or a bolster foam for feedback. Outcome measures will be assessed at predefined time points to evaluate changes in pain, function, and muscle activation. Findings from this trial aim to guide clinical practice by identifying the most effective feedback method for routine rehabilitation
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Treatment
- 盲法
- Single (Outcomes Assessor)
盲法说明
This will be a single-blinded study where the outcome assessor will be kept completely blinded to the participants' group allocation. Due to the visible nature of the feedback tools (gauge versus foam), the intervention administrators and the patients cannot be blinded
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 45 Years 至 65 Years（Adult, Older Adult）
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 否
入选标准
- •Patient diagnosis with Grade II knee Osteoarthritis.
- •Age between 45 and 65 years, encompassing the typical onset of symptomatic OA.
- •Both genders Male and Female are included.
- •Symptomatic patients meeting the following American College of Rheumatology criteria: average pain score ≥ 3 in the last week on the numerical rating scale, morning stiffness < 30 min, and joint crepitus
排除标准
- •History of knee surgery (TKA, HTO, ACLR) or arthroscopy in the affected knee within the last 6 months.
- •Intra-articular corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid injections within the last 3 months.
- •Neurological conditions affecting lower limb motor control (e.g., Stroke, Parkinson's, Radiculopathy).
- •Acute infection, tumor, or fracture around the knee joint.
- •Severe cognitive impairment or inability to follow visual/tactile cues.
结局指标
主要结局
Pain Intensity assessed via Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
时间窗: Baseline (week 0), Mid-Intervention (week 4), Post-Intervention (Week 8), and Follow-up (Week 12)
Knee pain intensity will be assessed using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Participants will rate their current knee pain, as well as their worst and best pain over the last 24 hours, on an 11-point integers scale. On this scale, 0 indicates "No pain" and 10 indicates "worst pain imaginable
Functional Status and Quality of Life assessed via WOMAC Index
时间窗: Baseline (week 0), Mid-Intervention (week 4), Post-Intervention (Week 8), and Follow-up (Week 12)
The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) will be utilized as the primary outcome measure for functional status and disease-specific quality of life. The index comprises 24 items covering three dimensions: Pain (Score range: 0-20), Stiffness (Score range: 0-8), and Physical Function (Score range: 0-68). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale (0=none to 4=Extreme), where higher aggregate scores indicate greater disability
Quadriceps Muscle Activation assessed via Modified Sphygmomanometer Test (MST)
时间窗: Baseline (week 0), Mid-Intervention (week 4), Post-Intervention (Week 8), and Follow-up (Week 12)
Quadriceps muscle activation will be assessed using the Modified Sphygmomanometer Test. A cuff is placed under the popliteal fossa and inflated to a baseline of 40 mmHg. The patient performs a Maximum Voluntary Isometric Contraction (MVIC), and the peak pressure sustained for 3 seconds is recorded. The final outcome is the change in pressure (Peak - Baseline) calculated from the average of 3 trials
次要结局
未报告次要终点