| Methods |
RCT
Method of randomisation: not reported‐stratified
Assessor blinding: yes
Participant blinding: not reported
Loss to follow‐up: 36% in PRT, 24% in Control (range of motion)
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: yes, done at the 30th month
Post‐program follow up: no |
| Participants |
Location: USA
N = 221 (113 in PRT)
Sample: knee OA
Age: mean = 69.4 years (SD = 8)
Inclusion criteria: not clearly described
Exclusion criteria: cannot walk without assistance, amputation of either lower extremity, knee or hip replacement, history of stroke, myocardial infarction, CHF, uncontrolled hypertension, fibromyalgia… |
| Interventions |
PRT versus flexibility (control)
1.PRT
Type of Ex: 2UL/2LL
Equipment: CYBEX machines at gym; Elastic bands at home,
Intensity: 8‐10 RM
Frequency: Ex3; first 3 months (2/week in the gym, 1/week at home), month 4‐6 (1/week in the gym, 2/week at home), month 7‐9 (2/month in the gym, 3/week at home); month 10‐12 (1/month in the gym, 3/week at home)
Reps/Sets: from 8‐10/ 3 to 12/2
Duration: 1 year
Setting: gym and home
Supervision: full‐1 fitness trainer in the gym
Adherence: attending gym (PRT‐59%, control/ROM‐64%); home ex (PRT‐56%, control/ROM‐62%)
2. Flexibility exercise group: N=108, mean age = 68.6 years (SD = 7.5), flexibility ex, 3 times/week |
| Outcomes |
Primary: SF‐36 (at the 30 month), WOMAC
Secondary: Strength measure (1RM)
Comments on adverse events: yes |
| Notes |
SF‐36 was not pooled because it was not measured right after the training |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
