Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 16;13(3):e0194517. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194517

Table 1. Study characteristics of the included articles.

Physiotherapeutic exercise intervention Control intervention Resultsf
Author (year, location) Study groups (n) Age (years)a Women (n (%)) Type Settingb (supervisionc) Duration (frequencyd) Intensitye Start and follow-upd Description Frequencyd Intensitye Joint & muscle function Functional performance Self-reported outcomes
Husby (2009, Norway) IG: 12; CG: 12 IG: 58 ± 5; CG: 56 ± 8 15 (63) Strengthening (+ control intervention) I; L (Y) 4w (5x pw) 4 series of 5RM 1w; 5w Usual care 5x pw 1h ↑ / = N/A =
Husby (2010, Norway) IG: 12; CG: 12 IG: 58 ± 5; CG: 56 ± 8 15 (63) Strengthening (+ control intervention) I; L (Y) 4w (5x pw) 4 series of 5RM 1w; 12m Usual care 5x pw 1h ↑ / = N/A =
Mikkelsen (2012, Denmark) IG: 23; CG: 21 67.3 ± 7 16 (36) Strengthening O; L (N) 12w (7x pw, 2x day) 1x10 reps 1d; 12w Usual care 7x pw, 2x day 1x10 reps = = =
Mikkelsen (2014, Denmark) IG: 32; CG: 30 IG: 64.8 ± 8; CG: 65.1 ± 10 26 (42) Strengthening O; L (P) 10w (2x pw; 5x pw home-based exercise) 30–40 min <1w; 10w-12m Usual care 7x pw, 2x day 1x10 reps = ↑ / = =
Nankaku (2016, Japan) IG: 14; CG: 14 IG: 60.5 ± 6.4; CG: 60.8 ± 7.5 24 (86) Strengthening (+ control intervention) I; L (Y) 4w (5x pw) 3x8-12 reps NR; 4w Usual care NR NR ↑ / =
Okoro (2016, UK) IG: 25; CG: 24 IG: 65.2 ± 9.1; CG: 66.3 ± 11.0 25 (51) Strengthening O; L (P) 6w (5x pw) Range of reps 4-7d; 9-12m Usual care NR NR = = / ↓ N/A
Suetta (2004, Denmark)g IG: 13; CG: 12 IG: 69 (range: 60–86); CG: 68 (range: 62–78) 19 (53) Strengthening (+ control intervention) O; L (Y) 12w (3x pw) Progressively increased from 20RM to 8RM ±7d; 12w Usual care 7x pw, 2x day 1h ↑ / = N/A
Maire (2004, France) IG: 7; CG: 7 75.1 ± 4.8 12 (86) Aerobic (+ control intervention) I; L (NR) 6w (3x pw) 30 min 1w; 2m Usual care 7x pw 2h N/A N/A =
Maire (2006, France) IG: 7; CG: 7 75.1 ± 4.8 12 (86) Aerobic (+ control intervention) I; L (NR) 6w (3x pw) 30 min 1w; 12m Usual care 7x pw 2h N/A N/A
Beaupre (2014, Canada) IG: 11; CG: 10 53.4 ± 9.3 10 (48) Functional O; L/W (NR) 3m (2x pw) 2.5h 6w; 12m Usual care NR NR = = =
Galea (2008, Australia) IG: 11; CG: 12 IG: 68.6 ± 9.7; CG: 66.6 ± 7.9 16 (70) Functional I; L (Y) 8w (2x pw) 45 min 8w; 16w Unsupervised home-based exercise NR NR N/A = =
Giaquinto (2010, Italy) IG: 31; CG: 39 IG: 70.1 ± 8.5; CG: 70.6 ± 8.4 IG: 21 (68); CG: 26 (67) Functional I; W (NR) 3w (6x pw) 40 min <10d; 6m Land-based therapy 6x pw 40 min N/A N/A
Heiberg (2012, Norway) IG: 35; CG: 33 66 (95% CI: 64, 67) 35 (51) Functional O; L (Y) 6w (2x pw) 70 min 3m; 12m No supervised physiotherapy NR NR = ↑ / = =
Heiberg (2016, Norway) IG: 30; CG: 30 70 (95% CI: 68, 72) 34 (57) Functional O; L (Y) 6w (2x pw) 70 min 3m; 5y No supervised physiotherapy NR NR = = =
Johnsson (1988, Sweden) IG: 14; CG: 16 IG: 70 (range: 58–67); CG: 66 (range: 50–74) 13 (43) Functional O; L (NR) 2-3m (0,5-2x pw) 45 min 2m; 6m No organized physiotherapy NR NR = = =
Monaghan (2016, Ireland) IG: 32; CG: 31 IG: 68 ± 8; CG: 69 ± 9 20 (32) Functional (+ control intervention) O; L (Y) 6w (2x pw) 35 min 12w; 18w Usual care NR NR = ↑/ =
Umpierres (2014, Brazil) IG: 54; CG: 52 61.4 ± 15.0 57 (54) Functional I/O; L (P) 2w (NR) NR 1d; 15d No supervised physiotherapy NR NR ↑ / = N/A =
Bodén (2004, Sweden) IG: 10; CG: 10 IG: 54 (range: 44–59); CG: 55 (range: 44–63) 11 (55) Functional and early full weight-bearing O; L (N) NR NR NR; 24m Partial weight-bearing and home-based exercise NR NR N/A N/A =
Monticone (2014, Italy) IG: 50; CG: 50 69 ± 8 60 (60) Functional and early full weight-bearing I; L (Y) 3w (5x pw) 90 min 4-7d; 12m Partial weight-bearing and center-based exercise 5x pw 90 min N/A N/A
Ström (2006, Sweden) IG: 17; CG: 19 54.4 (range: 26–63) 19 (53) Functional and early full weight-bearing O; L/W (Y) 3m (NR) NR NR; 12m Partial weight-bearing and a self-training program NR NR = N/A N/A

CG: control group; CI: confidence interval; IG: intervention group; NR: not reported.

a Age is shown as mean +/- SD, unless stated otherwise.

b Intervention: inpatient (I) or outpatient (O); land-based (L) or water-based (W).

c Whether the intervention was supervised: yes (Y), no (N) or partially (P).

d Shown as time since total hip arthroplasty: days (d), weeks (w), months (m) or years (y); pw: per week.

e Minutes (min); hours (h); repetition maximum (RM); repetitions (reps).

f Effect of the intervention: ↑ significant difference in favor of IG; = no significant difference between IG and CG; ↓ significant difference in favor of CG; N/A: not applicable as the article did not include this category of outcome measures.

g In this study a second intervention group was included that received neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in addition to the standard rehabilitation program (n = 11). However, the characteristics and results of this intervention group are not presented, since NMES was defined as an exclusion criterion for this systematic review.