Skip to main content

Table 4 Description of the studies and pre- post-intervention values

From: Hip abductor strengthening in patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis – a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY PARTICIPANTS OUTCOMES RESULTS OUTCOMES PRE – INTERVENTION POST – INTERVENTION
      SG CG SG CG
Bennell et al Sample size (n = 89)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 45) Control Group (CG) (n = 44)
Mean age of the SG group- 64.5 (9.1)
Mean age of the CG group- 64.6 (7.6)
Kellgran Lawrence (KL) grade 2 and above were included.
A 3-dimensional gait analysis to identify the knee adduction moment.11-point NPRS Maximal isometric strength of hip musculature Step test and timed stair ascent and descent task Hip abductor and adductor strengthening alone improved pain, function, and hip strength but did not alter knee adduction when compared with no treatment. KAM
VAS
WOMAC function
Step test
Timed stair task
Hip abduction torque
3.2 ± 1.0
4.3 ± 2.0
24.8 ± 10.9
16.2 ± 3.7
8.0 ± 2.7
0.9 ± 0.3
2.9 ± 0.9
4.1 ± 2.5
23.7 ± 11.8
16 ± 2.9
8.2 ± 2.3
0.8 ± 0.3
3.3 ± 0.9
2.6 ± 2.1
16.2 ± 11.7
18 ± 4.3
7.0 ± 2.2
1.0 ± 0.3
2.9 ± 0.9
3.9 ± 2.6
21.9 ± 11.0
16.9 ± 2.8
7.9 ± 1.8
0.9 ± 0.3
Jorge et al Sample size (n = 60)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 29)
Control Group (CG) (n = 31)
Mean age of the SG group-61.7 ± 6.4
Mean age of the CG group-59.9 ± 7.5
Kellgran Lawrence (KL) grade 1-4 were included
Pain (VAS scale)
Physical Function (WOMAC)
Walking Distance – 6MWT
Strength – 1RM
Quality of life – SF-36
Lower extremity progressive resistance exercise (inclusive of hip abductor and adductor strengthening) is effective when compared with a waitlist no treatment control group VAS
WOMAC function
SF 36
6MWT
7.0 ± 1.3
27.7 ± 9.3 39.3 ± 16.
357.1 ± 56.9
7.0 .0 ± 1.2
28.4 ± 10.6
32.4 ± 16.0
330.2 ± 55.9
4.3 ± 3.1
17.3 ± 12.4
49.8 ± 21.9
69.5 ± 60.8
6.6 ± 1.5
26.7 ± 10.2
30.8 ± 16.8
343.1 ± 54.7
Singh et al Sample size (n = 30)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 15)
Control Group (CG) (n = 15)
Mean age of the SG group- 55.33 ± 3.99
Mean age of the CG group- 54.86 ± 4.35
Kellgran Lawrence (KL) grades 2 and 3 were included.
Hip abductor strength by modified sphygmomanometer
Physical Function (WOMAC)
Walking Distance – 6MWT
Hip abductor strengthening and quadriceps exercise, when compared with quadriceps exercise alone, produced superior outcomes on function and walking distance. WOMAC function
6MWT
Hip Strength
116.13 ± 16.01
280.13 ± 28.27
97.30 ± 9.42
113.93 ± 16.40
279.11 ± 49.23
95.47 ± 18.10
59.46 ± 12.44
378.37 ± 27.81
124.70 ± 9.45
82.73 ± 13.96
320.07 ± 46.40
96.56 ± 18.45
Yuenyongviwat et al Sample size (n = 97)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 42)
Control Group (CG) (n = 44)
Mean age of the SG group- 62.8 ± 6.80
Mean age of the CG group- 62.5 ± 8.4
Kellgran Lawrence (KL) grades 2 and 3 were included.
Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) All KOOS subscales were significantly improved in both groups after 10 weeks. No significant difference in the scores between either group at 2–10 weeks after treatment. Nevertheless, the effects of exercise for pain, symptoms, function in daily living and knee related quality of life were found to have faster improvement within the hip abduction exercise group compared to the control group KOOS
Pain
Symptoms
ADL
Sports and Recreation
Quality of Life
70
76
77
29
48
74
80
81
32
50
89
90
92
47
72
91
89
95
55
77
Wang et al Sample size (n = 82)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 41)
Control Group (CG) (n = 41)
Mean age of the SG group- 58.4(5.3)
Mean age of the CG group- 59.2(6.1)
Kellgran Lawrence (KL) grades of 2 and above were included on the study
Pain (VAS Scale)
Physical Function
(WOMAC)
Strength was assessed by an Isokinetic Dynamometer Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test, stair ascent/descent task and Figure of 8 walk test.
Hip abductor strengthening and quadriceps exercises, when compared experimental group had superior outcomes in stair ascent/descent task, figure of 8 Walk test, and pain; but not in the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test and Self-reported functional difficulties score VAS
WOMAC
Fig. of 8 walk test
FTSST
Strength of hip Abduction
Stair Ascent and Descent
5.70 ± 1.00
33.8 ± 9.9
10.92 ± 2.23
15.53 ± 3.95
1.16 ± 0.33
21.05 ± 3.96
5.50 ± 0.93
32.3 ± 7.5
10.47 ± 1.38
15.49 ± 2.60
1.16 ± 0.33
20.55 ± 2.59
3.12 ± 0.83
20.9 ± 6.0
8.58 ± 1.42
3.51 ± 3.77
1.31 ± 0.36
17.10 ± 3.23
3.54 ± 1.08
26.8 ± 5.9
75 ± 1.25
13.98 ± 2.69
1.18 ± 0.37
19.35 ± 2.83
Chaudhary Ashok Sample size (n = 30)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 15)
Control Group (CG) (n = 15)
Mean age of the SG group- 51.33(5.2326)
Mean age of the CG group- 52(5.0142)
Kellgren-Lawrence radiographic grade I, II and III were included in the study
Pain (VAS)
Physical function (WOMAC)
Hip abductor muscle strengthening exercises showed overall improvement in pain and physical function and is a useful adjunct exercise therapy in treating patients with unilateral medial compartment knee osteoarthritis VAS
WOMAC
7 ± 1.690
66.66 ± 6.986
2 ± 1.463
27.66 ± 4.237
6.93 ± 1.387
67.13 ± 6.577
4.066 ± 1.907
37.46 ± 6.356
Elizabeth A. Sled Sample Size (n = 40)
Strengthening Group (SG) (n = 20)
Control Group (CG) (n = 20)
Mean age of the SG group- 62.98 (9.73)
Mean age of the CG group- 62.98 (9.73)
Kellgren-Lawrence radiographic grading was included.
Five-Times-Sit-To-Stand test
WOMAC
Hip abductor strengthening did not reduce knee joint loading but did improve function and reduce pain in a group with medial knee OA. Five-Times-Sit-To-Stand test
WOMAC
15.2 (12.6–17.9)
19.60 (15.95–23.25)
12.5 (10.6–14.4)
18.15 (14.19–22.11)
10.1 (9.2–11.0)
1.2 (0.25–2.15)
9.3 (8.4–10.2)
1.24 (0.00–2.46)
  1. CI Confidence interval, CG Control groups Strengthening group, KL Kellgren, and Lawrence, KAM Knee adduction moment, MD Mean difference, NPRS Numeric Pain Rating Scale, OA OA, SF-36 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, VAS Visual analog scale, KOOS Knee OA Outcomes Survey, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index, 1RM One repetition Maximum. CG Control group, SG Strengthening group, F Frequency, D Duration, 1RM One repetition Maximu