Skip to content

Nordic or Conventional Walking: which is more effective for people with knee osteoarthritis and metabolic risk?

Efficacy of Nordic Walking versus Conventional Walking in individuals with knee Osteoarthritis and Metabolic Risk: A pragmatic randomized clinical trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-49fgk6d
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2025-11-11
Start date
2025-12-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-11-17

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

Conditions

Body Composition

Interventions

This is a pragmatic randomized clinical trial with two parallel groups that will compare the effects of Nordic Walking associated with health education with those of Conventional Walking associated wi

Sponsors

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina- UFSC
Lead Sponsor
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina- UFSC
Collaborator

Eligibility

Age
45 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Clinical diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis according to the guidelines of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), which include being 45 years or older, having joint pain related to physical activity, and not presenting morning joint stiffness or presenting morning stiffness lasting less than 30 minutes; higher level of pain reported in the knee compared to other joints; waist circumference greater than 88 centimeters for women or greater than 102 centimeters for men, characterizing increased metabolic risk according to the World Health Organization guidelines

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Cognitive deficits that impair understanding of instructions or provision of informed consent; inability to walk independently for at least 15 minutes; clinical conditions that contraindicate regular physical exercise; previous orthopedic surgeries in the lower limbs, pelvis, or spine within the last 18 months, including arthroplasty such as knee or hip replacement, arthroscopy, osteotomy, ligament or meniscal repairs, fracture fixation, spinal decompression or fusion; surgeries with relevant impact on body weight or metabolism such as bariatric surgery performed within the last 18 months; any surgery within the last 6 months that required immobilization for more than 14 consecutive days, restricted physical activity, or required supervised rehabilitation; other surgical procedures, at the discretion of the study coordination, that may interfere with functional capacity, pain, or muscle performance; intra-articular injection in the knee within the last 6 months; musculoskeletal trauma in the lower limbs within the last 6 months; history of knee arthroplasty regardless of date; minor outpatient procedures will not be considered exclusion criteria, such as simple dental surgeries including root canal treatment, cleaning, or simple extractions, minor dermatological surgeries such as removal of cysts or lipomas, low-impact ophthalmologic surgeries such as cataract surgery, diagnostic procedures such as colonoscopy or endoscopy, insertion of an intrauterine device (IUD) or minor gynecological procedures, provided that they did not restrict physical activity for more than 7 days in the last 3 months

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
An improvement is expected in knee pain, assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), a validated instrument that measures pain intensity in millimeters ranging from 0 (no pain) to 100 (maximum pain), and through the Tech Pain application, a validated digital tool for recording and monitoring pain intensity and variation in real time during the intervention period.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
It is expected an improvement in functional performance, assessed by the 6-minute walk test, 30-second chair stand test, and step test; in body composition, evaluated by waist circumference, total body mass, lean mass, and total, regional, and subcutaneous fat; in muscle quality, assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), considered the gold standard method for analyzing body composition and tissue density, and by ultrasound imaging, used to measure muscle thickness and quality; and in muscle strength, evaluated by isokinetic dynamometry, which quantifies torque, power, and muscular endurance during controlled movements. These outcomes will be analyzed to identify possible structural and functional changes associated with the interventions after 12 weeks of follow-up

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactJosiel Ribeiro

Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina

josiel.ribeiro@posgrad.ufsc.br+55 (92) 98615-5366

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)