Educational Program Associated With a Conventional Spa Therapy of Knee Osteoarthritis Patients

Knee Osteoarthritis Clinical Trial

— GETT2  

Official title:

Evaluation of the Added Value of an Educational Program Associated With a Conventional Spa Therapy of Knee Osteoarthritis Patients

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03550547
• Other study ID #: 2017-A03323-50
• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: March 11, 2019
• Est. completion date: May 28, 2022

Study information

• Verified date: November 2020
• Source: Association Francaise pour la Recherche Thermale
• Contact: Emmanuel COUDEYRE, MD-PhD
• Phone: +33473750900
• Email: ecoudeyre[@]chu-clermontferrand.fr
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The main objective of this work is to measure the efficiency of 18 days SPA Therapy in orientation rheumatology associated with an educational intervention in patients with knee osteoarthritis on a priority objective, personalized and determined by the patient, chosen in the list of 5 objectives determined during the educational assessment.

Description:

This program begin with a shared educational balance assessment allowing to set up the individual program adapted to the objectives personalized by the patients. The objectives to achieve are to allow the patients to acquire knowledge and skills (attitudes, behavior) concerning their pathology and the existing treatment. A multidisciplinary team trained in the therapeutic education of the patient assure the educational interventions. The proposed educational activities (7 educational workshops) concern major axes of the care of the knee osteoarthritis: knowledge of the pathology, the adapted physical exercise, the dietetics, the management of the pain, the articular hygiene and the technical helps.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Recruiting
• Enrollment: 250
• Est. completion date: May 28, 2022
• Est. primary completion date: November 28, 2021
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 50 Years to 75 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients, male or female, aged 50 to 75 years
• Patients with knee osteoarthritis clinical criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)
• Patient affiliated to a social security scheme (beneficiary entitled)
• Patient registered spa
• Pain intensity equal or more than "3" at the Visual Analogical Scale
• Patient has given its consent in writing to

Exclusion Criteria:

• Contraindication to the spa therapy
• Trouble behavior or understanding making it impossible to assess

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Knee Osteoarthritis
• Osteoarthritis
• Osteoarthritis, Knee

Intervention

Other:
• Educational workshops
1 workshop : Knowledge of the pathology ; 2a workshop: Educational physical activity; 2b workshop : Educational physical activity; 4 workshop : Dietary; 5 workshop : Management of pain, fatigue and the medical treatments; 6 workshop : Articular hygiene and ergonomics; 7 workshop : Technical assistance, an adaptation of the living condition
• Spa Therapy
Approved Spa therapy of knee osteoarthritis patients

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
France	Etablissement thermal	Dax	Aquitaine

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Association Francaise pour la Recherche Thermale	University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand

Country where clinical trial is conducted

France, 

References & Publications (5)

Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988 Dec;15(12):1833-40. — View Citation

Forestier R, Desfour H, Tessier JM, Françon A, Foote AM, Genty C, Rolland C, Roques CF, Bosson JL. Spa therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a large randomised multicentre trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Apr;69(4):660-5. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.113209. Epub 2009 Sep 3. — View Citation

Krasny-Pacini A, Evans J, Sohlberg MM, Chevignard M. Proposed Criteria for Appraising Goal Attainment Scales Used as Outcome Measures in Rehabilitation Research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Jan;97(1):157-70. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.08.424. Epub 2015 Sep 4. — View Citation

Mendelson AD, McCullough C, Chan A. Integrating self-management and exercise for people living with arthritis. Health Educ Res. 2011 Feb;26(1):167-77. doi: 10.1093/her/cyq077. Epub 2010 Dec 1. — View Citation

Rockwood K, Joyce B, Stolee P. Use of goal attainment scaling in measuring clinically important change in cognitive rehabilitation patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 May;50(5):581-8. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Measuring effectiveness of the educational workshops, personalized and determined for every patient.	Average change from effectiveness of the educational workshops, personalized and determined for every patient, measured by a GAS GAS (Goal Attainment Scaling in Rehabilitation) is a method of scoring the extent to which patient's individual goals are achieved in the course of intervention. In effect, each patient has their own outcome measure but this is scored in a standardized way as to allow statistical analysis.; Each goal is rated on a 5-point scale, with the degree of attainment captured for each goal area: If the patient achieves the expected level, this is scored at 0.; If they achieve a better than expected outcome this is scored at: +1 (more than expected), +2 (much more than expected); If they achieve a worse than expected outcome this is scored at: -1 (less than expected) or -2 (much less than expected) GAS depends on two things - the patient's ability to achieve their goals and the clinician's ability to predict outcome, which requires knowledge and experience.	Month 06
Secondary	Functional status	Score on WOMAC; The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) is widely used in the evaluation of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis. It is a questionnaire consisting of 24 items divided into 3 subscales: Pain (5 items), stiffness (2 items), physical Function (17 items). The test questions are scored on a scale of 0-4, which correspond to: None (0), Mild (1), Moderate (2), Severe (3), and Extreme (4).; The scores for each subscale are summed up, with a possible score range of 0-20 for Pain, 0-8 for Stiffness, and 0-68 for Physical Function. Usually a sum of the scores for all three subscales gives a total WOMAC score, however there are other methods that have been used to combine scores.; Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate worse pain, stiffness, and functional limitations.	Day 01, Day 18, Month 03, Month 06, Month 09, Month 12.
Secondary	Pain intensity	Average change from baseline in the pain intensity measured on a Visual Analogical Scale (VAS) Visual analog scale (VAS) and its corresponding visual analog pain scale, is a psychometric scale that is generally used to conduct pain scale surveys to understand varying degrees of pain or discomfort experienced by a patient. The score is determined by measuring the distance (mm) on the 10-cm line between the "no pain" anchor and the patient's mark, providing a range of scores from 0-100. A higher score indicates greater pain intensity. The following cut points on the pain VAS have been recommended: no pain (0-4 mm), mild pain(5-44 mm), moderate pain (45-74 mm), and severe pain (75-100 mm)	Day 01, Day 18, Month 03, Month 06, Month 09, Month 12.
Secondary	Life quality	Average change from baseline of the Life quality, measured by a SF36. It is one of the most widely used generic measures of health-related quality of life and has been shown to discriminate between subjects with different chronic conditions and between subjects with different severity levels of the same disease. The SF-36 has also demonstrated sensitivity to significant treatment effects in a variety of patient populations. The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.	Day 01, Day 18, Month 03, Month 06, Month 09, Month 12.
Secondary	Comprehensive evaluation of patient education programs	Average change from baseline of the comprehensive evaluation of patient education programs , measured by a HEIQ.; The Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ): an outcomes and evaluation measure for patient education and self-management interventions for people with chronic conditions.; There are 8 sections: dressing, arising, eating, walking, hygiene, reach, grip, and activities. There are 2 or 3 questions for each section. Scoring within each section is from 0 (without any difficulty) to 3 (unable to do). For each section the score given to that section is the worst score within the section, i.e. if one question is scored 1 and another 2, then the score for the section is 2.	Day 18, Month 03, Month 06, Month 09, Month 12
Secondary	Measuring effectiveness of the educational workshops, personalized and determined for every patient.	Average change from effectiveness of the educational workshops, personalized and determined for every patient, measured by a GAS; GAS (Goal Attainment Scaling in Rehabilitation) is a method of scoring the extent to which patient's individual goals are achieved in the course of intervention. In effect, each patient has their own outcome measure but this is scored in a standardized way as to allow statistical analysis.; Each goal is rated on a 5-point scale, with the degree of attainment captured for each goal area: If the patient achieves the expected level, this is scored at 0.; If they achieve a better than expected outcome this is scored at: +1 (more than expected), +2 (much more than expected); If they achieve a worse than expected outcome this is scored at: -1 (less than expected) or -2 (much less than expected) GAS depends on two things - the patient's ability to achieve their goals and the clinician's ability to predict outcome, which requires knowledge and experience.	Day 01, Day 18, Month 03, Month 09, Month 12.