Biomechanical markers associations with pain, symptoms, and disability compared to radiographic severity in knee osteoarthritis patients: a secondary analysis from a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background Conventional radiography is commonly used to diagnose knee osteoarthritis (OA), but also to guide clinical decision-making, despite a well-established discordance between radiographic severity and patient symptoms. The incidence and progression of OA is driven, in part, by biomechanical m...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC musculoskeletal disorders 2022-10, Vol.23 (1), p.1-896, Article 896
Hauptverfasser: Bensalma, Fatima, Hagemeister, Nicola, Cagnin, Alix, Ouakrim, Youssef, Bureau, Nathalie J, Choinière, Manon, Mezghani, Neila
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Conventional radiography is commonly used to diagnose knee osteoarthritis (OA), but also to guide clinical decision-making, despite a well-established discordance between radiographic severity and patient symptoms. The incidence and progression of OA is driven, in part, by biomechanical markers. Therefore, these dynamic markers may be a good metric of functional status and actionable targets for clinicians when developing conservative treatment plans. The aim of this study was to assess the associations between biomechanical markers and self-reported knee function compared to radiographic severity. Methods This was a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in primary care clinics with knee OA participants. Correlation coefficients (canonical ([rho]) and structural (Corr)) were assessed between the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and both, radiographic OA severity using the Kellgren-Lawrence grade, and three-dimensional biomechanical markers quantified by a knee kinesiography exam. Significant differences between coefficients were assessed using Fischer's z-transformation method to compare correlations from dependent samples. Results KOOS and biomechanical data were significantly more associated than KOOS and X-ray grading ([rho]: 0.41 vs 0.20; p < 0.001). Structural correlation (Corr) between KOOS and X-ray grade was 0.202 (4% of variance explained), while individual biomechanical markers, such as the flexion during loading, explained up to 14% of KOOS variance (i.e., Corr.sup.2). Biomechanical markers showed the strongest associations with Pain and Activity of Daily Living KOOS subscales (both > 36% variance explained), while X-ray grading was most associated with Symptoms subscale (21% explained; all p [less than or equai to] 0.001). Conclusions Knee biomechanical markers are associated with patient-reported knee function to a greater extent than X-ray grading, but both provide complementary information in the assessment of OA patients. Understanding how dynamic markers relate to function compared to radiographic severity is a valuable step towards precision medicine, allowing clinicians to refine and tailor therapeutic measures by prioritizing and targeting modifiable biomechanical markers linked to pain and function. Trial registration Original RCT was approved by the Research Ethics Boards of École de technologie supérieure (H20150505) and Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montré
ISSN:1471-2474
1471-2474
DOI:10.1186/s12891-022-05845-1