Skip to content

A Biomechanical Exercise Program for Knee OA

Clinical and Tissue Outcomes of a Biomechanical Exercise Program for Knee Osteoarthritis

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02370667
Enrollment
31
Registered
2015-02-25
Start date
2015-08-31
Completion date
2016-07-31
Last updated
2017-03-10

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Osteoarthritis, Knee

Keywords

Exercise, Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Brief summary

Prescribing exercise for people with painful knee osteoarthritis (OA) is essential for pain management, improved function, and chronic disease prevention. Exercise that decreases joint exposure to damaging loading while eliciting adequate muscular activation for strength improvements is ideal. The purpose of this 3-arm RCT is to compare mobility, strength, pain, and MRI outcomes between the low-loading biomechanical exercise program (BE), a traditional exercise program for knee OA (TE), and a control group completing meditation classes (M).

Detailed description

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common joint disease affecting 1 in 10 Canadians. Osteoarthritis commonly presents in the knee joint and is associated with mobility limitations, pain, and an increased risk of other chronic health conditions such as heart disease. It is critical to implement exercise for people with knee OA as it can be an effective method for improving pain, mobility, and cardiovascular health. A biomechanical exercise program using static yoga postures has been established in the investigators lab based on minimizing damaging knee joint loads, while effectively exercising the musculature around the knee joint. The investigators pilot project (REB#13-510) showed that a 12-week yoga program using these biomechanical exercises improved pain and mobility while keeping the medial joint loading well below that experienced during normal level walking. The next step with this exercise program is to compare clinical and tissue outcomes with that of a regularly prescribed aerobic and strengthening program, as well as a control group completing meditation classes. The investigators aim to identify differences in clinical mobility performance outcomes, muscle and fat volumes using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and cartilage integrity using MRI between the three groups using a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design.

Interventions

OTHERBiomechanical Exercise (BE)

A biomechanical exercise program shown to decrease joint loading will be administered 3 times a week for 12 weeks. Outcomes will include mobility performance; pain; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis.

OTHERTraditional Exercise (TE)

A traditional exercise program for people with knee OA will be administered 3 times a week for 12 weeks. Outcomes will include mobility performance; pain; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis.

OTHERMeditation Control (M)

A meditation program acting as a control will be administered 3 times a week for 12 weeks. Outcomes will include mobility performance; pain; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis.

Sponsors

McMaster University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
50 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* 50 years of age or older * Knee pain on most days of the week * Less than 30 minutes of morning stiffness * Bony enlargement * Bony tenderness to palpation * Signs of inflammation * Able to safely climb 2 flights of stairs without aid

Exclusion criteria

* Any other forms of arthritis * Osteoporosis * History of patellofemoral symptoms * Active non-arthritic knee disease * Knee surgery * Use of cane or walking aid * Unstable heart condition * Neurological conditions * Skin allergy to medical tape * Hip or ankle injuries in past 3 months * Any injuries that would prohibit participation in yoga * Ipsilateral hip or ankle conditions * Currently receiving cancer treatment * Currently pregnant

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Lower Extremity FunctionWeek 1 and Week 13The Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) consists of 20 items, on an adjectival scale, that assess difficulty during mobility tasks ranging from transfers to running. The LEFS is scored from 0 to 80 with higher scores represent better self-reported physical function. It is reliable and valid in knee OA and has superior sensitivity to change compared to similar measures. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Mobility Performance (Timed Up and Go Test)Week 1 and Week 13Mobility performance was measured using the Timed Up and Go Test. This test measures the time taken to rise from a standard chair with arm rests, walk 3m, and return to a seated position. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in time in seconds (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Arthritis-related Self-efficacyWeek 1 and Week 13The Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES) measures arthritis-specific beliefs regarding perception of performance on certain tasks to cope with the disease. The ASES is measured using 20 questions on a 10-100 scale with respect to three main areas: pain management (5 questions), physical function (9 questions), and other symptoms (6 questions). Higher numbers indicate greater certainty that a participant can cope with a particular task as a consequence of their disease. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Depression StatusWeek 1 and Week 13Depression was assessed with the Centre of Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale, a 20-item scale developed for the general population with emphasis on affect. Elements of affect include mood, guilt, worthlessness, helplessness, appetite, and sleep. The CES-D is scored from 0 to 60 with a score of 16 or higher indicating depression. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Frailty StatusWeek 1 and Week 13Frailty was assessed using the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS). The EFS is a brief screening interview for older adults to assess frailty that is commonly used in both inpatient and outpatient settings. The scale covers 8 domains: cognition, general health status, functional independence, social support, medication use, nutrition, mood, continence, and functional performance (defined as performance on the Timed Up and Go \[TUG\] test). The test is scored out of 17, with higher scores indicating higher levels of frailty. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Mobility Performance (Six-Minute Walk Test)Week 1 and Week 13Mobility performance was measured using the Six-Minute Walk Test. For this test, participants are instructed to walk as far as possible in 6 minutes. The distance covered in 6 minutes is recorded. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in distance in metres (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Mobility Performance (40m Walk Test)Week 1 and Week 13Mobility performance was measured using the 40m Walk Test. This test measures the time taken to complete a fast-paced 40m walk. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in time in seconds (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Mobility Performance (30-second Chair Stand Test)Week 1 and Week 13Mobility performance was measured using the 30-second Chair Stand Test. This test measures the number of times participants can rise and lower from a standard height chair, without using arm rests, in a 30-second period. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in number (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Ascent)Week 1 and Week 13Mobility performance was measured using the Stair Ascent Test. For this test, the time taken to ascent nine stairs is recorded. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in time in seconds (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Self-reported Knee PainWeek 1 and Week 13Change in self-reported knee pain was assessed with 3 valid and reliable questionnaires: the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP) score, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). The KOOS pain score represents a normalized score from 0 (extreme symptoms) to 100 (no symptoms). KOOS scores closer to 100 indicate fewer symptoms. The ICOAP consists of two sub-scales: constant pain (5 items) and intermittent pain (6 items). The score from each subscale represents a normalized score from 0 (no pain) to 100 (extreme pain). ICOAP scores closer to 0 indicate less pain. The NPRS pain score represents a score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). NPRS ratings were provided following maximum isometric knee extensor exertions and flexor exertions. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Isokinetic Knee Extensor and Flexor PowerWeek 1 and Week 13The peak isokinetic torque developed during knee extension and flexion at 25% resistance of their maximum voluntary isometric contraction was measured by use of a Biodex System 2 isokinetic dynamometer. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in power (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms. Data is expressed in W/kg.
Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Week 1 and Week 13Peak grip strength was assessed using a Jamar hand dynamometer. The hand dynamometer was set to a fixed position and all values of grip force were expressed in kg. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in absolute force (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Week 1 and Week 13Peak grip strength was assessed using a Jamar hand dynamometer. The hand dynamometer was set to a fixed position and all values of grip force were expressed in kg/kg (grip force/body mass). The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in relative force (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Cardiovascular FitnessIntended to be collected on week 1 and week 13Cardiovascular fitness will be calculated using the YMCA submaximal cycle ergometry test. Predictions of VO2max will be made from heart rate (measured with a heart rate monitor) and load (Watts).
Change in Muscle and Fat VolumeIndented to be collected on week 1 and week 13Muscle and fat volumes from magnetic resonance images will be segmented using a custom program. The images will be acquired using a • Iterative Decomposition of water and fat with Echo Asymmetry and Least-squares estimation (IDEAL) sequence on a 3.0T MR750 Discovery research-grade scanner.
Change in Cartilage MorphologyWeek 1 and Week 13Cartilage morphology will be assessed in open-sourced and custom programs. Sodium (23Na+) images and T2 mapping will be completed on the 3.0T MR750 DIscovery research-grade scanner. The mean (95% confidence interval) percent change from baseline to follow-up was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)Week 1 and Week 13Cytokines interleukin-6 (IL6), tumour necrosis factor (TNF), and interleukin-10 (IL10) are important markers of the inflammatory response. These markers will be assessed using standard blood draw and nasal swabs collected by a medical professional. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in concentration in pg/ml (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Inflammatory Markers (CRP)Week 1 and Week 13C-reactive protein (CRP) is an important marker of the inflammatory response. This markers will be assessed using standard blood draw and nasal swabs collected by a medical professional. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in concentration in ug/ml (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.
Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthWeek 1 and Week 13The peak torque developed during knee extension and flexion during a maximum voluntary isometric contraction was measured by use of a Biodex System 2 isokinetic dynamometer. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in torque (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms. Data is presented as Nm/kg.

Countries

Canada

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)
The participants in this arm will be asked to attend 3 group classes per week for 12 weeks at a local yoga studio taught by a certified yoga instructor. Four class times will be offered per week. These classes will include a warm-up, static poses shown to decrease knee joint loading, and a cool down including flexibility exercises. Measurements will be obtained at baseline (before intervention) and at follow-up (following intervention). Outcomes will include clinical mobility; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; pain; isometric leg strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis. Biomechanical Exercise (BE): A biomechanical exercise program shown to decrease joint loading will be administered 3 times a week for 12 weeks. Outcomes will include mobility performance; pain; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis.
10
Traditional Exercise (TE)
The participants in this arm will be prescribed an aerobic and strengthening exercise program often prescribed to those with knee OA. The program will include 15 minutes of walking per class, closed kinetic chain strengthening exercises on machines, and a cool down consisting of stretching. Participants will be asked to come to class 3 times per week for 12 weeks. Certified Kinesiologists as well as student volunteers will be available during all class times for program completion and progression. Traditional Exercise (TE): A traditional exercise program for people with knee OA will be administered 3 times a week for 12 weeks. Outcomes will include mobility performance; pain; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis.
11
Meditation Control (M)
The participants in this arm will be asked to attend 3 meditation classes per week for 12 weeks taught by a certified yoga instructor with a specialization in meditation. This will take place at an alternate yoga studio to avoid contamination. Since it is known that exercise is beneficial for pain management and strengthening in knee OA, participants randomized to the control group will be offered a free exercise pass following completion of the study. Meditation Control (M): A meditation program acting as a control will be administered 3 times a week for 12 weeks. Outcomes will include mobility performance; pain; muscle and fat volumes, and cartilage morphology using MRI; strength; cardiovascular fitness; and gait analysis.
10
Total31

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up010

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicBiomechanical Exercise (BE)Traditional Exercise (TE)Meditation Control (M)Total
Age, Continuous65.5 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.6
63.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.9
71.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.3
66.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.5
Region of Enrollment
Canada
10 participants11 participants10 participants31 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
10 Participants11 Participants10 Participants31 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 100 / 110 / 10
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 100 / 110 / 10

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Lower Extremity Function

The Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) consists of 20 items, on an adjectival scale, that assess difficulty during mobility tasks ranging from transfers to running. The LEFS is scored from 0 to 80 with higher scores represent better self-reported physical function. It is reliable and valid in knee OA and has superior sensitivity to change compared to similar measures. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Lower Extremity Function10.6 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Lower Extremity Function7.6 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Lower Extremity Function-6.4 Change in scores on a scale
Secondary

Change in Arthritis-related Self-efficacy

The Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES) measures arthritis-specific beliefs regarding perception of performance on certain tasks to cope with the disease. The ASES is measured using 20 questions on a 10-100 scale with respect to three main areas: pain management (5 questions), physical function (9 questions), and other symptoms (6 questions). Higher numbers indicate greater certainty that a participant can cope with a particular task as a consequence of their disease. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Arthritis-related Self-efficacy0.2 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Arthritis-related Self-efficacy2.6 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Arthritis-related Self-efficacy0.7 Change in scores on a scale
Secondary

Change in Cardiovascular Fitness

Cardiovascular fitness will be calculated using the YMCA submaximal cycle ergometry test. Predictions of VO2max will be made from heart rate (measured with a heart rate monitor) and load (Watts).

Time frame: Intended to be collected on week 1 and week 13

Population: Data for this outcome measure were not collected.

Secondary

Change in Cartilage Morphology

Cartilage morphology will be assessed in open-sourced and custom programs. Sodium (23Na+) images and T2 mapping will be completed on the 3.0T MR750 DIscovery research-grade scanner. The mean (95% confidence interval) percent change from baseline to follow-up was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Medial Femur-3.7 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Lateral Femur3.2 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Medial Tibia-1.8 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Lateral Tibia-1.9 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Medial Femur-1.4 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Lateral Femur2.4 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Medial Tibia2.2 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Lateral Tibia3.9 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Medial Femur-2.6 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Lateral Femur0.2 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Medial Tibia2.0 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Lateral Tibia1.1 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Lateral Tibia1.3 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Medial Femur-1.0 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Medial Tibia0.7 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Medial Femur-1.9 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Lateral Femur-2.2 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Lateral Femur-5.0 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Medial Tibia0.7 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Medial Tibia-3.0 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Lateral Tibia2.5 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Medial Femur-6.2 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Lateral Tibia-0.7 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Lateral Femur-3.4 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Lateral Tibia7.5 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Medial Femur-2.6 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Lateral Femur2.1 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Lateral Femur-0.4 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Medial Tibia-7.3 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyVolume - Lateral Tibia0.6 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Medial Tibia-5.4 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Medial Femur-1.3 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Lateral Femur-1.2 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Medial Femur-3.1 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyT2 - Medial Tibia3.9 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Meditation Control (M)Change in Cartilage MorphologyThickness - Lateral Tibia-0.4 % Change from Baseline to Follow-up
Secondary

Change in Depression Status

Depression was assessed with the Centre of Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale, a 20-item scale developed for the general population with emphasis on affect. Elements of affect include mood, guilt, worthlessness, helplessness, appetite, and sleep. The CES-D is scored from 0 to 60 with a score of 16 or higher indicating depression. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Depression Status1.0 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Depression Status1.0 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Depression Status-3.6 Change in scores on a scale
Secondary

Change in Frailty Status

Frailty was assessed using the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS). The EFS is a brief screening interview for older adults to assess frailty that is commonly used in both inpatient and outpatient settings. The scale covers 8 domains: cognition, general health status, functional independence, social support, medication use, nutrition, mood, continence, and functional performance (defined as performance on the Timed Up and Go \[TUG\] test). The test is scored out of 17, with higher scores indicating higher levels of frailty. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Frailty Status0.3 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Frailty Status-0.2 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Frailty Status-1.1 Change in scores on a scale
Secondary

Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)

Peak grip strength was assessed using a Jamar hand dynamometer. The hand dynamometer was set to a fixed position and all values of grip force were expressed in kg. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in absolute force (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

Population: Note: only 9 participants were analyzed for the Left Side

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Right Side Grip Strength0.4 Change in kg
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Left Side Grip Strength1.0 Change in kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Right Side Grip Strength-0.1 Change in kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Left Side Grip Strength-1.5 Change in kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Right Side Grip Strength1.2 Change in kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Grip Strength (Absolute)Left Side Grip Strength0.1 Change in kg
Secondary

Change in Grip Strength (Relative)

Peak grip strength was assessed using a Jamar hand dynamometer. The hand dynamometer was set to a fixed position and all values of grip force were expressed in kg/kg (grip force/body mass). The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in relative force (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

Population: Note: only 9 participants were analyzed for the Left Side

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Right Side Normalized Grip Strength0.0 Change in kg/kg
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Left Side Normalized Grip Strength0.0 Change in kg/kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Right Side Normalized Grip Strength0.0 Change in kg/kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Left Side Normalized Grip Strength0.0 Change in kg/kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Right Side Normalized Grip Strength0.0 Change in kg/kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Grip Strength (Relative)Left Side Normalized Grip Strength0.0 Change in kg/kg
Secondary

Change in Inflammatory Markers (CRP)

C-reactive protein (CRP) is an important marker of the inflammatory response. This markers will be assessed using standard blood draw and nasal swabs collected by a medical professional. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in concentration in ug/ml (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (CRP)16.3 Change in ug/ml
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (CRP)-12.3 Change in ug/ml
Meditation Control (M)Change in Inflammatory Markers (CRP)-12.0 Change in ug/ml
Secondary

Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)

Cytokines interleukin-6 (IL6), tumour necrosis factor (TNF), and interleukin-10 (IL10) are important markers of the inflammatory response. These markers will be assessed using standard blood draw and nasal swabs collected by a medical professional. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in concentration in pg/ml (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

Population: For IL10: n=6 (BE), n=8 (TE), n=6 (M)

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)TNF-3.4 Change in pg/ml
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)IL6-0.6 Change in pg/ml
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)IL10-11.9 Change in pg/ml
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)TNF0.3 Change in pg/ml
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)IL60.0 Change in pg/ml
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)IL10-2.6 Change in pg/ml
Meditation Control (M)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)IL60.1 Change in pg/ml
Meditation Control (M)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)IL101.2 Change in pg/ml
Meditation Control (M)Change in Inflammatory Markers (IL6, TNF, IL10)TNF0.3 Change in pg/ml
Secondary

Change in Isokinetic Knee Extensor and Flexor Power

The peak isokinetic torque developed during knee extension and flexion at 25% resistance of their maximum voluntary isometric contraction was measured by use of a Biodex System 2 isokinetic dynamometer. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in power (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms. Data is expressed in W/kg.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

Population: One participant in TE did not complete the power evaluation.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Isokinetic Knee Extensor and Flexor Power0.3 Change in W/kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Isokinetic Knee Extensor and Flexor Power0.8 Change in W/kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Isokinetic Knee Extensor and Flexor Power-0.1 Change in W/kg
Secondary

Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor Strength

The peak torque developed during knee extension and flexion during a maximum voluntary isometric contraction was measured by use of a Biodex System 2 isokinetic dynamometer. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in torque (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms. Data is presented as Nm/kg.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthKnee Extensor Torque0.1 Change in Nm/kg
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthKnee Flexor Torque0.0 Change in Nm/kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthKnee Extensor Torque0.0 Change in Nm/kg
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthKnee Flexor Torque0.1 Change in Nm/kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthKnee Extensor Torque0.0 Change in Nm/kg
Meditation Control (M)Change in Isometric Knee Extensor and Flexor StrengthKnee Flexor Torque0.0 Change in Nm/kg
Secondary

Change in Mobility Performance (30-second Chair Stand Test)

Mobility performance was measured using the 30-second Chair Stand Test. This test measures the number of times participants can rise and lower from a standard height chair, without using arm rests, in a 30-second period. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in number (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Mobility Performance (30-second Chair Stand Test)3.4 Change in number of sit-to-stand cycles
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Mobility Performance (30-second Chair Stand Test)2.5 Change in number of sit-to-stand cycles
Meditation Control (M)Change in Mobility Performance (30-second Chair Stand Test)1.8 Change in number of sit-to-stand cycles
Secondary

Change in Mobility Performance (40m Walk Test)

Mobility performance was measured using the 40m Walk Test. This test measures the time taken to complete a fast-paced 40m walk. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in time in seconds (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Mobility Performance (40m Walk Test)-3.9 Change in seconds
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Mobility Performance (40m Walk Test)-2.9 Change in seconds
Meditation Control (M)Change in Mobility Performance (40m Walk Test)4.0 Change in seconds
Secondary

Change in Mobility Performance (Six-Minute Walk Test)

Mobility performance was measured using the Six-Minute Walk Test. For this test, participants are instructed to walk as far as possible in 6 minutes. The distance covered in 6 minutes is recorded. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in distance in metres (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Mobility Performance (Six-Minute Walk Test)59.3 Change in metres
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Mobility Performance (Six-Minute Walk Test)54.0 Change in metres
Meditation Control (M)Change in Mobility Performance (Six-Minute Walk Test)19.1 Change in metres
Secondary

Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Ascent)

Mobility performance was measured using the Stair Ascent Test. For this test, the time taken to ascent nine stairs is recorded. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in time in seconds (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Ascent)-1.7 Change in seconds
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Ascent)-0.7 Change in seconds
Meditation Control (M)Change in Mobility Performance (Stair Ascent)1.9 Change in seconds
Secondary

Change in Mobility Performance (Timed Up and Go Test)

Mobility performance was measured using the Timed Up and Go Test. This test measures the time taken to rise from a standard chair with arm rests, walk 3m, and return to a seated position. This measure has produced reliable and valid data in persons with knee OA. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference in time in seconds (follow-up - baseline) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Mobility Performance (Timed Up and Go Test)-1.3 Change in seconds
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Mobility Performance (Timed Up and Go Test)-0.3 Change in seconds
Meditation Control (M)Change in Mobility Performance (Timed Up and Go Test)0.2 Change in seconds
Secondary

Change in Muscle and Fat Volume

Muscle and fat volumes from magnetic resonance images will be segmented using a custom program. The images will be acquired using a • Iterative Decomposition of water and fat with Echo Asymmetry and Least-squares estimation (IDEAL) sequence on a 3.0T MR750 Discovery research-grade scanner.

Time frame: Indented to be collected on week 1 and week 13

Population: Data for this outcome measure were not collected.

Secondary

Change in Self-reported Knee Pain

Change in self-reported knee pain was assessed with 3 valid and reliable questionnaires: the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP) score, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). The KOOS pain score represents a normalized score from 0 (extreme symptoms) to 100 (no symptoms). KOOS scores closer to 100 indicate fewer symptoms. The ICOAP consists of two sub-scales: constant pain (5 items) and intermittent pain (6 items). The score from each subscale represents a normalized score from 0 (no pain) to 100 (extreme pain). ICOAP scores closer to 0 indicate less pain. The NPRS pain score represents a score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). NPRS ratings were provided following maximum isometric knee extensor exertions and flexor exertions. The mean (95% confidence interval) difference score (follow-up score - baseline score) was computed for each of the three study arms.

Time frame: Week 1 and Week 13

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainKOOS Pain21.5 Change in scores on a scale
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainNPRS Extensor-1.6 Change in scores on a scale
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainICOAP Constant Pain-24.5 Change in scores on a scale
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainNPRS Flexor-0.9 Change in scores on a scale
Biomechanical Exercise (BE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainICOAP Intermittent Pain-23.7 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainICOAP Constant Pain-15.0 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainKOOS Pain8.3 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainICOAP Intermittent Pain-14.3 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainNPRS Extensor-0.7 Change in scores on a scale
Traditional Exercise (TE)Change in Self-reported Knee PainNPRS Flexor-0.3 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Self-reported Knee PainNPRS Flexor2.3 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Self-reported Knee PainNPRS Extensor2.8 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Self-reported Knee PainKOOS Pain-2.1 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Self-reported Knee PainICOAP Constant Pain-10.5 Change in scores on a scale
Meditation Control (M)Change in Self-reported Knee PainICOAP Intermittent Pain-4.2 Change in scores on a scale

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 24, 2026