| Literature DB >> 35027029 |
Indiana Cooper1, Peter Brukner2, Brooke L Devlin3, Anjana J Reddy3, Melanie Fulton3, Joanne L Kemp2, Adam G Culvenor4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis has an inflammatory component that is linked to pain and joint pathology, yet common non-surgical and non-pharmacological interventions (e.g., exercise, calorie restricting diets) do not typically target inflammation. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a telehealth delivered anti-inflammatory diet intervention for knee osteoarthritis.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-inflammatory diet; Knee Joint; Low-carbohydrate diet; Mediterranean diet; Osteoarthritis; Telehealth
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35027029 PMCID: PMC8757404 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05003-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Overview of the anti-inflammatory diet interventiona
| Name | Anti-inflammatory diet intervention |
| What | Education and discussion 1-to-1 supplemented with a study booklet of examples of foods to consume and recipes |
| Who provides | Accredited Practising Dietitian or researchers (trained by dietitian to deliver the intervention). |
| How | 1-to-1 telehealth sessions via Zoom or telephone consult (when video teleconferencing was not available for follow-up appointments). All baseline appointments were delivered by telehealth videoconferencing. |
| Where | Remotely conducted telehealth sessions by researchers in Melbourne to participants throughout Australia. |
| When & how much | Telehealth 1-to-1 sessions: baseline, 3- and 6-week follow-up. Baseline: 45–90 min. Follow-ups: 10–15 min. |
| Tailoring | • Dietary education provided including list of acceptable food groups and possible adverse outcomes. • Standardised meal plan and shopping list provided, however, encouraged acceptable modifications to suit individual lifestyle and palate. • Individualised feedback and education provided at each follow-up after assessment of most recent 3-day food diary. • Individualised education provided at each follow-up for participants who had specific questions regarding their food intake and acceptable foods. |
| How well | Attendance at telehealth sessions recorded by the intervention dietitian or trained researcher. Self-reported dietary adherence recorded on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from never adherent to adherent every day). |
aDescribed according to the Template for Intervention Description and Replication [34]
Overview of data collection
| Variable | Baseline | Week 3 | Week 6 | Week 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethnicity | X | |||
| Highest education level | X | |||
| Employment status | X | |||
| Civil status | X | |||
| Living situation | X | |||
| Comorbidities | X | |||
| Knee symptom history | X | |||
| 24-h recall food diary | X | |||
| Current knee pain | X | X | X | X |
| Height and weight | X | X | X | X |
| EuroQoL-5D | X | X | X | X |
| Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score | X | X | X | X |
| Analgesic medication use | X | X | X | X |
| 3-day food diary | X | X | X | |
| Adverse events | X | X | X | X |
Fig. 1Flow of participants through the study
Feasibility outcomes
| Anti-inflammatory intervention | Recommendations for full-scale clinical trial | |
|---|---|---|
| Recruitment rate | 14 participants per month | Could be increased utilising physiotherapy and orthopaedic clinics. |
| Eligibility rate | 48 of 73 (66%) screened participants eligible | |
| Enrolment rate | 28 of 48 (58%) of eligible participants enrolled | |
| Drop-out rate | 6 (21%) | Strategies required to improve drop-out rate may include better education of intervention and follow-up requirements prior to enrolment, having a patient ambassador or using an interactive mobile app to optimise engagement. |
| Dietary adherence | 96% reported adherence on the Likert scale of ≥4/5 at final follow-up | Increased meal plans/recipes. Utilisation of interactive food recording tools. |
| Telehealth attendance | 99% consult attendance | |
| Food Diary completion | 100% completion of diaries | |
| Injury or illness | (1 constipation, 1 increased knee pain following fall) | Could incorporate more overt preventive strategies for constipation. |
| Treatment satisfaction | Participants reported appointments were appropriate regarding: availability, frequency and duration. Participants were satisfied with the diet intervention with most (86%) of interviewed participants stating they would continue the diet. | Consider initial baseline face-to-face consultation with tele-health follow-up. |
| Time to collect data | Baseline appointments completed in <90 min. Follow-up appointments completed in 10–15 min. | |
| Completeness of patient-reported outcomes | Of the 22 participants attending the 9-week follow-up, with a total of 88 data collection events (4 each): - Missing data n = 1 (1%) - Incomplete data n = 6 (7%) | Data checking mechanisms to reduce incomplete data. |
| Adherence monitoring | 15 participants used Participants reported that the macronutrient tracker on the | |
Supporting quotes from post-intervention interviews exploring the intervention accessibility, acceptability and adherence
Overview of baseline participant characteristics
| Variable | Total ( |
|---|---|
| Age, mean ± standard deviation years | 66 ± 8 |
| Female sex, n (%) | 22 (82) |
| Height, mean ± standard deviation cma | 166.6 ± 8.2 |
| Weight, mean ± standard deviation kga | 84.4 ± 16.0 |
| Body mass index, mean ± standard deviation kg.m-2a | 30.6 ± 4.6 |
| Caucasian ethnicity, n (%) | 27 (100) |
| Highest education level, n (%) | |
| Up to secondary school | 1 (4) |
| Completed secondary school | 8 (30) |
| Apprenticeship | 3 (11) |
| Bachelor’s degree | 10 (37) |
| Post-graduate degree | 5 (19) |
| Employment, n (%) | |
| Full-time | 3 (11) |
| Part-time | 5 (19) |
| Casual | 1 (4) |
| Retired | 18 (67) |
| Living arrangement, n (%) | |
| Alone | 5 (19) |
| With spouse | 18 (67) |
| With family | 4 (15) |
| Household income $AUD, n (%) | |
| < 50,000 | 13 (48) |
| > 50,000 | 9 (33) |
| Undisclosed | 5 (19) |
| Co-morbidities, n (%) | |
| Diabetes | 1 (4) |
| Hypertension | 8 (30) |
| Dyslipidaemia | 5 (19) |
| Pulmonary disease | 1 (4) |
| Cancer | 3 (11) |
| Otherc | 5 (19) |
| Knee affected by osteoarthritis, n (%) | |
| Left | 14 (52) |
| Right | 11 (41) |
| Both | 2 (7) |
| Average knee pain (0–10), mean ± standard deviationb | 4.8 ± 1.7 |
| Maximal knee pain (0–10), mean ± standard deviation | 7.1 ± 1.8 |
| Duration of knee pain, n (%) | |
| 0–6 months | 5 (19) |
| 6–12 months | 4 (15) |
| 1–3 years | 8 (30) |
| > 3 years | 10 (37) |
| Past knee injury, n (%) | 14 (52) |
| Family history of osteoarthritis, n (%) | 18 (67) |
| Knee | 8 (30) |
| Other jointd | 10 (37) |
| Analgesic use, n (%)b | 22 (82) |
| Paracetamol | 16 (59) |
| Oral NSAID | 6 (22) |
| Topical NSAID | 3 (11) |
| Glucosamine | 3 (11) |
| Corticosteroid | 3 (11) |
| Opioid | 1 (4) |
| Codeine | 2 (7) |
| Methotrexate | 1 (4) |
| Anti-depressant (chronic pain) | 1 (4) |
NSAID Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug
# One participant who withdrew from the study did not consent for their data to be included in the paper
a n = 3 missing baseline anthropometry due to no equipment
bn = 1 data incomplete: Participant did not complete knee pain or analgesic use
c Other medical conditions include coeliac disease, osteoporosis, vascular disease, fibromyalgia
dOther osteoarthritis includes: hip, hand, shoulder and back
Fig. 2Mean ± standard deviation daily intake in those who completed all follow-ups (n = 22). A) Total energy; B) Carbohydrate; C) Fat; D) Protein. ** Indicates significant absolute change in variable from baseline (week 0) to week 9
Patient-reported and anthropometric data in participants who completed all follow-up (n = 22)
| Outcome | Baseline | Week 3 | Week 6 | Week 9 | Changea | 95% CI of change | MDC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KOOS-Pain | 61.8 ± 12.0b | 63.1 ± 11.4 | 68.8 ± 12.2c | 68.4 ± 12.3 | 6.6 ± 12.6 | [0.9 to 12.4] | 8–10 |
| KOOS-Symptoms | 56.9 ± 14.3b | 57.3 ± 15.4 | 58.6 ± 16.7c | 62.5 ± 17.7 | 5.6 ± 15.1 | [−1.3 to 12.5] | 8–10 |
| KOOS-ADL | 68.2 ± 15.9b | 72.2 ± 13.2b | 75.8 ± 14.6c | 78.3 ± 14.4 | 10.1 ± 14.3 | [3.6 to 16.6] | 8–10 |
| KOOS-Sport/Rec | 35.7 ± 27.3b | 47.4 ± 27.9b | 46.8 ± 25.2c | 46.9 ± 29.6 | 11.2 ± 19.7 | [2.2 to 20.2] | 8–10 |
| KOOS-QoL | 42.0 ± 16.4b | 46.3 ± 14.6b | 50.9 ± 14.5c | 50.8 ± 13.7 | 8.8 ± 14.7 | [2.1 to 15.5] | 8–10 |
| KOOS4 | 57.2 ± 10.9b | 59.95 ± 10.7b | 63.5 ± 10.8c | 65.0 ± 12.4 | 7.8 ± 11.5 | [2.5 to 13.0] | 8–10 |
| EQ 5 D Utility | 0.70 ± 0.16b | 0.74 ± 0.1 | 0.74 ± 0.11c | 0.75 ± 0.12 | 0.04 ± 0.16 | [−0.03 to 0.11] | N/A |
| EQ 5 D VAS | 75.2 ± 15.1b | 77.5 ± 15.1 | 78.9 ± 15.4c | 81.6 ± 14.6 | 6.3 ± 16.0 | [−0.9 to 13.6] | N/A |
| Average Pain (0-100 mm) | 52.6 ± 22.7b | 52.1 ± 21.3b | 41.6 ± 23.0d | 43.6 ± 27.5c | −8.9 ± 35.6 | [−26.1 to 8.2] | N/A |
| BMI, kg/cm2 | 30.7 ± 4.8d | 29.7 ± 4.6b | 29.5 ± 4.6c | 29.6 ± 4.3b | −1.0 ± 0.8 | [−1.4 to −0.7] | N/A |
| Weight, kg | 86.6 ± 15.0d | 83.7 ± 13.9b | 82.7 ± 13.8c | 83.6 ± 13.7b | −3.0 ± 2.3 | [−4.1 to −1.8] | N/A |
KOOS Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, ADL Activities of daily living, QoL Quality of life, EQ 5D EuroQoL-5D, BMI Body mass index, MDC Minimal detectable change, VAS Visual analogue scale, CI Confidence interval
aChange indicates absolute change from baseline to week 9. All data presented as mean ± standard deviation for participants completing the intervention and had baseline data. Minimal detectable change values drawn from previous estimations [43]
bn = 1 missing data relative to number of participants in each timepoint column
cn = 2 missing data relative to number of participants in each timepoint column
dn = 3 missing data relative to number of participants in each timepoint column
Fig. 3Baseline to week 9 change scores per participant for the KOOS-QoL subscale. Baseline and follow-up KOOS scores range from 0 (extreme problems) to 100 (no problems). Positive change scores indicate an improvement in quality of life. KOOS, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; MDC, minimal detectable change; QoL, quality of life