| Methods |
RCT
Method of randomisation: table of random numbers used
Assessor blinding: no
Participant blinding: no
Loss to follow‐up: no
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: No dropouts, not stated ITT
Post‐program follow up: no |
| Participants |
Location: USA
N = 20
Sample: man and women with knee OA
Age: mean 64.5 years in PRT group
Inclusion criteria: from rheumatology clinic, no condition to preclude increased activity/strength training, not currently involved in a scheduled program of regular of exercise and had not participated in a strength‐training program in the last 6 months
Exclusion criteria: not reported |
| Interventions |
PRT versus control
1.PRT
Type of Ex:1LL
Equipment: isokinetic dynamometer (Cybex II)
Intensity: high ‐ maximal contractions
Frequency: Ex3
Reps/Sets: 5/ 6 by session 6 (the end of week 2)
Program duration: 8 weeks
Setting: gym
Supervision: full
Adherence: not reported
2. Control Group: usual activities |
| Outcomes |
Strength (isokinetic dynamometer)
Timed walk
Range of motion
Health status (Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales; higher score = poor health status)
Osteoarthritis Screening Index (OASI; modified from Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index; higher score = worse health)
Comments on adverse events: no |
| Notes |
|
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
