Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Effect of Physical Therapy Interventions in the Acute Care Setting on Function, Activity, and Participation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

Curry, Alisa L.; Goehring, Meri T.; Bell, Jessica; Jette, Diane U.

Journal of Acute Care Physical Therapy : July 2018 - Volume 9 - Issue 3 - p 93–106
doi: 10.1097/JAT.0000000000000079
Original Studies
Open
SDC

Background: Despite seemingly routine use of physical therapy and its potential importance in reducing complications after total joint arthroplasty in the acute hospital setting, no agreed-upon approach to rehabilitation exists in this setting. In fact, rehabilitation practices and outcomes assessed are quite variable.

Purpose: To determine the effects of physical therapy interventions in the acute care phase of total knee arthroplasty.

Data Sources: Ovid Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL.

Review Selection Criteria: Peer-reviewed research from January 1996 to October 2016 of adults with primary total knee arthroplasty receiving any physical therapy intervention related to body systems/function impairments or activity/participation limitations measured within 7 days of surgery. All studies included a comparison group.

Data Extraction: Two reviewers extracted data and determined study quality.

Data Synthesis: Qualitative summary considering studies' risk of bias and number favoring interventions for outcomes.

Results: Thirty-nine studies were included. Interventions included extra therapy, accelerated therapy, cryotherapy, Chinese medicine, lymphatic drainage, mechanical and manual passive motion, active-assistive motion, biofeedback, and electrical stimulation. Most studies included undefined “standard care.” Outcomes varied, with pain and knee motion commonly reported.

Conclusions: Evidence supports cryotherapy for reducing pain and accelerated therapy for improving range of motion and walking, but quality is low. High-quality studies in these areas are needed.

Alisa L. Curry, PT, DPT, GTC, GCS Institute for Joint Restoration and Research, Washington Hospital Healthcare System Fremont, California

Meri T. Goehring, PT, PhD, GCS Grand Valley State University College of Health Professions Grand Rapids, Michigan

Jessica Bell, MS MGH Institute of Health Professions Boston, Massachusetts

Diane U. Jette, PT, DSc, FAPTA Institute of Health Professions, MGH Institute of Health Professions Boston, Massachusetts

The authors have no conflicts of interest and no source of funding to declare.

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's Web site (www.jacpt.com).

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

Growth in the population of active older adults has resulted in an increasing prevalence of degenerative and end-stage arthritis and a growing demand for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) as an effective treatment for the pain and activity.1–3 According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information and the United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, from 2010 to 2011, a total of 762 000 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures were performed in Canada and the United States. In 2014, hip and knee TJAs were the most common inpatient surgery for Medicare recipients, costing more than $7 billion.4 The American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons reported that more than 7 million people were living with TJA in 2010, including 4.7 million Americans with TKA.5

The Affordable Care Act, passed into law in the United States in 2010, included provisions that move the health care system away from a fee-for-service model toward models that bundle payments for an overall episode of care. In April 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Innovation Center implemented the Comprehensive Center for Joint Replacement model initially in 67 US metropolitan areas to test a bundled payment model for TJA and encourage improved coordination and quality of care from surgery through all rehabilitation.6 In this model, optimization of postsurgical outcomes relies on providers' appreciation of the type and severity of patients' bodily impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions, as well as the interventions that best address these at all stages of recovery.

Given the Comprehensive Center for Joint Replacement and the role played by physical therapists in the overall care of patients undergoing TJA, an understanding of the best approach to acute care rehabilitation of people with TJA is needed. In a 2012 study of 93 community hospitals in North Carolina, the mean percentage of patients with both hip and knee TJA receiving physical therapy was 98%.7 Despite seemingly routine use of physical therapy and its potential importance in reducing complications8 after TJA in the acute hospital setting, no approach to rehabilitation in this setting appears to be standard. Rehabilitation practices and outcomes, in terms of functional measures as well as length of stay, are quite variable.7,9–12 Therapists now have even less time to evaluate, educate, and train these patients for their initial recovery phase, with patients now leaving the acute care setting as soon as same day of surgery or postoperative day (POD) 1. This variability of care may be related to a lack of evidence, low quality of evidence, or inconsistency in the evidence related to the effect of rehabilitation interventions.

Consistent with the aims of the Affordable Care Act and, specifically, the Comprehensive Center for Joint Replacement—providing people with the best care and securing the best outcomes after TJA—identifying best practices becomes imperative. Therefore, a systematic review of the literature published from January 1996 to October 2016 was performed to address the PICOT (Population, Issue, Comparison, Outcome, Timing) question: what is the effect of physical therapy interventions on impairments, activities, and participation following primary TKA in the early postoperative phase (7 days)? In addition, this review sought to identify gaps in knowledge to lay the groundwork for the development of new evidence needed to enhance clinical decision making.

Back to Top | Article Outline

RATIONALE FOR EARLY PHYSICAL THERAPY INTERVENTIONS POST-TKA

Total knee arthroplasty results in significant loss of quadriceps strength, decreased knee range of motion (ROM), and diminished functional abilities compared with preoperative measures.13 Husted et al14 noted that pain, dizziness, general weakness, and limitations in personal care and walking were primary reasons that patients with TJA were not discharged earlier. Chan et al15 noted a negative correlation between pain and time each day spent walking in the post–acute care phase of TKA, suggesting that activity may be useful in managing pain. Lowe et al16 found support for the use of functional exercises for improving function, range of joint motion, and quality of life 3 to 4 months postoperatively. The results from these studies suggest that pain, limitations in strength, ROM, and activity might be addressed by physical therapy interventions received in the acute care setting.

Back to Top | Article Outline

METHODS

Data Sources and Searches

A medical librarian derived search terms and strategies in consultation with one of the reviewers. Databases searched included Ovid Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL. The search strategy for Ovid Medline is outlined in Table 1. The other searches used similar terms but were slightly adapted by the librarian to meet the particular search engine specifications. Following selection of studies to include, we reviewed the reference lists of each to check for additional references that should be considered. No attempt was made to contact authors for data, nor did we search for unpublished studies.

TABLE 1

TABLE 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

Inclusion Criteria

Types of Studies, Language, and Dates

Studies published in peer-reviewed literature in English from 1996 through October 2016 were included.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Participants

Studies of adult participants with primary total knee replacement regardless of cause were included. Those with participants undergoing revision TKA or unicondylar or “partial” replacements were included if the data for these participants could be separated from those with primary TKA. In addition, studies including participants with conditions other than TKA were included if the data related to TKA were reported separately.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Interventions

Only studies with interventions that could be considered to be within physical therapists' scope of practice were included. However, the interventions may not have been administered by physical therapists in the study.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Outcomes and Timing

Studies with outcomes related to impairments of body systems/function or limitations in activity and participation, measured within 7 days of surgery or discharge from acute care hospital, were included. Those reporting outcomes later than 7 days were included only if the earlier data (≤7 days) were separately reported. In addition, studies reporting data as being collected “at discharge” from the acute care hospital were included, regardless of length of stay, because the interventions provided and outcomes measured were within the acute care setting. Studies were included regardless of the method or measurement tool used to determine the outcomes.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Exclusion Criteria

Studies without comparison groups, case reports, and nonsystematic reviews of the literature were excluded because of their low level of evidence. Studies with participants undergoing revision TKA or unicondylar or “partial” replacements were excluded unless the data for these participants could be separated from those with primary TKA.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

Two reviewers independently read each unique title and abstract identified in the searches to determine whether they met the inclusion and exclusion criteria based on the study question. Any differences were discussed and resolved. If the 2 reviewers were unable to resolve a disagreement, a third reviewer was consulted to develop consensus. In some cases, where the abstract was unclear, the final decisions about inclusion or exclusion required reading the full text of an article. Questionable articles were reread by 2 of the reviewers and further decisions were made about their inclusion and exclusion. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. Reasons for exclusion were documented on the basis of the PICOT question.

Two reviewers independently extracted and summarized data from each selected study. Discrepancies were noted and corrected by referring back to the study text and tables (see Supplemental Digital Content Table 2, available at: http://links.lww.com/JACPT/A4, and Supplemental Digital Content Table 3, available at: http://links.lww.com/JACPT/A5).

Two reviewers assessed the quality of each trial and determined the risk of bias based on that assessment. When the reviewers disagreed, consensus was reached through review of the text and discussion. Risk of bias was determined on the basis of 4 categories of criteria. (1) Selection bias: adequate method of randomization, allocation concealment; (2) performance bias: blinding of participants and assessors; (3) attrition bias: accounting for all participants and analysis of data within assigned groups at follow-up; and (4) reporting bias: full reporting of data for all analyses suggested in the “Methods” section. As most studies were not randomized controlled trials with published protocols, we could not determine whether the “Methods” section selectively excluded some of the measured outcomes; however, we did determine whether studies provided data for each of the outcomes indicated in the “Methods” section. The level of bias (high, moderate, low) was determined by whether the study met a 50% or more of the criteria in each of the 4 categories. Risk of bias was deemed low if 50% or more criteria were met in each category; moderate if 50% or more criteria were met in all but 1 category; and high if 50% or more criteria were not met in more than 1 category. Systematic reviews were assessed for quality using criteria from the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool.17

Back to Top | Article Outline

Data Synthesis and Analysis

Given the variety of study methods, poorly reported data, and heterogeneous interventions and outcomes, we undertook a qualitative, summary analysis of the data, rather than quantitative. In determining our recommendations for practice, we simultaneously weighed the quality of studies, the number of participants represented by studies, and the number of studies favoring (or not) particular interventions for various outcomes. We derived recommendations through consensus.

Back to Top | Article Outline

RESULTS

Our search of electronic databases yielded 686 unique titles. Additional searching of reference lists garnered an additional 30 titles. Of these, 572 were excluded on the basis of the title and abstract reviews. We read 144 full-text articles. Subsequently, based on the full text, 104 studies were excluded as they failed to meet inclusion criteria. A total of 40 studies, including 2 systematic reviews, were included in this review (see Figure 1).

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

Risk of Bias

The studies had varying risks of bias (see Supplemental Digital Content Table 2, available at: http://links.lww.com/JACPT/A4, and Figures 2 and 3). Adequate methods of randomization were not applied in 9 studies18–26 and randomization was unclear in 2 studies.27,28 Concealed allocation was not accomplished in 16 of the studies18–26,28–34 and in 2 it was not clear.27,35 Most studies did not blind the participants due to the nature of the interventions; however, 8 studies provided sham interventions.36–43 Methods used in 14 studies suggested that the assessors were not blinded,19,20,22–24,26,28–30,33,34,40,42,44 and blinding of assessors was unclear in 9 other studies.18,21,25,31,35,43,45–47 In 8 studies, the loss of participants suggested attrition bias,23,25,26,30,32,42,43,48 and in 3 other studies, the degree of loss to follow-up was not clear.20,21,46 Of those studies with clear or uncertain attrition bias, 10 did not appear to include intention to treat analysis.20,21,25,26,30,32,42,43,46,48 Although we did not check for preregistration of trials, 7 studies demonstrated reporting bias in failing to provide data for all the outcomes suggested in the “Methods” section.21,22,31,40,45,48,49 The risk of bias was low in the 2 systematic reviews.50,51

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 3

FIGURE 3

Back to Top | Article Outline

Effect of Interventions

Additional Sessions of Rehabilitation

Three studies with a total of 192 participants examined the effect of “additional sessions” of rehabilitation, that is, beyond the routine number of sessions provided at that facility.19,42,52 One study with high risk of bias compared groups with 7 days and 6 days of therapy.19 The authors failed to demonstrate an effect of the additional day of therapy on ability to meet goals at discharge, discharge placement, or length of hospital stay. The study did not report adverse events. Two studies, 1 with low52 and 1 with moderate42 risk of bias examined the effect of 2 sessions per day of walking or other physical therapy intervention compared with 1 daily session. No differences were found for knee ROM, function, pain, or patient satisfaction.

Back to Top | Article Outline

“Early” or “Enhanced” Rehabilitation

Five studies examined the effect of early or enhanced rehabilitation.23–25,40,53 This intervention generally involved multidisciplinary protocols for optimizing pain management and aggressive and accelerated postoperative mobility protocols, for example, having patients walking within hours of the surgery. The studies included only 2 trials. One trial with low risk of bias and 273 participants reported favorable results for therapy initiated within 24 hours postoperatively compared with therapy started within 48 to 72 hours.53 Knee ROM and knee strength were greater in the intervention group, and a greater proportion of participants in the early intervention group demonstrated normal gait and normal balance. Measurements were apparently completed at discharge from hospital, although the timing was not clearly stated. One trial with moderate risk of bias and 147 participants receiving the enhanced protocol reported differences in American Knee Society scores and Western Ontario and McMaster University Arthritis Index scores at POD 5 and POD day 7.40 One study with high risk of bias included a total of 143 participants.24 It reported that participants receiving the enhanced intervention demonstrated greater walking distance, more time out of bed, and less knee swelling at POD 5 but not POD 3, as well as more stairs climbed at POD 3 and POD 5 than the comparison group. None of the other outcomes, including pain, ROM, and length of stay were different between groups. The study also reported 2 severe (wound healing and hospital readmission) and 7 minor adverse events in the intervention group.

One observational study with a historic comparison group and data from 2344 patients reported that length of stay in hospital in the group receiving enhanced rehabilitation was 2 days shorter.25 No statistical comparisons were provided.25 One retrospective study in which patients were divided into groups that received therapy of POD 1 versus POD 2 included 1504 patients.23 Differences were observed in ability to achieve 90° of knee flexion, improved odds of using less support for walking, and decreased length of stay and hospital costs in the group receiving the enhanced intervention.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Cryotherapy

We included 2 systematic reviews investigating the effects of cryotherapy. Adie et al50 included 12 studies with 809 participants. Ni et al51 included 12 studies with a total of 660 TKAs. Two studies on cryotherapy that were captured in our search but were not included in the systematic reviews are included here.26,45 Both systematic reviews favored cryotherapy over any type of comparison for improvements in pain at POD 2. The Adie et al50 systematic review also favored cryotherapy over any type of comparison for improving knee ROM at discharge. The results for pain at POD 1 and POD 3, knee ROM at POD 1, swelling, and length of stay were not significant in either systematic review. Adie et al50 determined that the level of evidence was “very low” for most outcomes. The most common adverse events were discomfort due to the cold temperature, necessitating withdrawal of its application. The 2 studies that we identified that were not in either systematic review included a total of 182 participants. Demoulin et al45 with moderate risk of bias examined the effect of gaseous CO2 over cold pack and Cryocuff (Aircast, Vista, California) for pain, swelling, and knee ROM for 88 participants. Thienpont26 had a high risk of bias and compared continuous computer-assisted cryotherapy with intermittent cold pack. The studies reported no effects on pain, knee ROM, walking, knee swelling, or length of stay. No adverse events were reported in either study.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Acupressure, Acupuncture, and Traditional Chinese Medicine

Four studies including 223 patients examined the effect of some form of traditional Chinese intervention.35,37–39 Two studies with low risk of bias examined the effect of acupressure compared with sham acupressure.37,39 He et al37 demonstrated a positive effect on pain at POD 3 through POD 7. Differences between groups, however, were less than 1 point on a scale of 0 to 10. The other study found no effect on pain but positive effects on passive knee ROM.39 Adverse events, reported in one study, included nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and urinary retention.37

Tsang et al38 examined the effect of acupuncture over sham acupuncture and no differences between groups for pain, knee ROM, and ambulation status at POD 4. The study did not report adverse events but was found to show low risk of bias.

Yang et al35 reported the use of traditional Chinese medicine. This study showed moderate risk of bias. One intervention group combined traditional Chinese medicine with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, physical therapy, and continuous passive motion (CPM), and 1 intervention group combined it with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and CPM. The comparison group received nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, physical therapy, and CPM. The findings favored both intervention groups over the comparison group for pain and active knee extension. Two infections occurred in one of the intervention groups.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Compression and Manual Lymph Drainage

Three studies and a total of 195 participants reported the effects of some type of compression or massage to promote lymphatic drainage and reduce swelling.47,48,54 One study with moderate risk of bias reported no effect of compression stocking compared with no compression stocking postoperatively on swelling pain and knee ROM.47 Two studies examined the effects of manual lymphatic drainage (MLD).48,54 In one study with low risk of bias, MLD was combined with CPM and cryotherapy and compared with exercise only.54 The findings favored the intervention group for improvements in knee flexion for 1 of 2 measurements on POD 4 only. Results were not significant for ROM during other PODs or for pain and swelling. The study reported one complication of deep vein thrombosis. The other study of MLD had a high risk of bias.48 It compared MLD with standard rehabilitation to relaxation with standard rehabilitation and reported no effect of treatment on measures of pain, ROM, gait, or swelling. Adverse events were not reported.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Knee ROM-CPM

Twelve studies with 1067 participants reported on the use of CPM in postoperative management.18,21,27,28,30–32,46,49,55–57 One study with high risk of bias reported positive effects of active CPM over a static hold in knee flexion on length of stay.30 The control group with static hold in flexion and no CPM demonstrated less swelling than the intervention group below the joint line only. One study with moderate risk of bias reported positive results for a group receiving more aggressive (greater knee ROM) CPM over a group receiving less aggressive CPM, and an exercise-only group on active and passive knee flexion at POD 5 and pain over the course of 5 days.27 One study with high risk of bias favored CPM done 23 hours per day for 6 days over immobilization for a significant improvement in total ROM at POD 7.31

Eight studies ranging from low to high risk of bias reported no effect of CPM on knee ROM.21,28,30,32,46,55–57 Four studies ranging from low to high risk of bias reported no effect on CPM on length of stay.27,28,49,57 Three studies with moderate risk of bias32,46,56 and 1 with high risk of bias30 showed no effect of CPM on pain. Two studies with moderate risk of bias46,56 and 1 with high risk of bias28 reported no effect of CPM on knee swelling. Two studies, 1 with low risk of bias57 and 1 with moderate risk of bias46 reported no effect of CPM in function as measured by the Timed Up and Go test or Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.

Seven studies reported adverse events.21,27,28,30,31,49,57 They included wound infections or increased drainage, pulmonary embolism, deep and superficial vein thromboses, hematoma, cardiovascular issues, urinary retention and infection, a need for manipulation or revision, and temporary peroneal palsy.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Knee ROM-Manual Passive Exercise

Various types of manual passive knee ROM were reported in 3 studies.18,22,33 One study with moderate risk of bias reported no effect of having 20 minutes of passive ROM by a physical therapist added to a regimen of active ROM, quadriceps strengthening, gait training, and CPM on pain or knee flexion ROM.18 Another study with moderate risk of bias reported no effects of A+ joint mobilization for the knee on ROM, pain, or length of stay.33 A third study with high risk of bias examined the effect of “drop and dangle” technique for achieving knee flexion compared with CPM.22 Increased knee flexion was demonstrated at POD 1, POD 2, and discharge.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Knee ROM-Active-Assistive Exercise

Three studies with 177 participants examined the effect of active assistive exercise equipment.29,44,55 One study with low risk of bias examined the effect of adding a slider board to a standard exercise regimen to assist participants with independent, low-friction, active exercises for knee extension and flexion.55 This intervention group was compared with groups receiving CPM with a standard exercise regimen and the standard exercise regimen only. No significant results were reported for knee flexion or extension ROM at discharge. Adverse events included hematoma, erythema, and increased swelling. Another study with moderate risk of bias examined the effect of adding independent sling active-assisted exercise for knee flexion and extension to a standard physical therapy regimen.44 The study compared the intervention to CPM with a standard physical therapy regimen. The study reported greater passive knee flexion and better score for Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Score (HHS)-ROM. Nonsignificant results were reported for activity level, balance and postural control, length of stay, pain, and function. Adverse events were not reported. A third study examined the effects of a specific proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation technique in combination with a standard post-TKA program compared with the standard program alone.29 No differences were found for knee ROM or walking. Several adverse events were reported including urinary retention, lumbar radiculopathy, abscesses, and urinary tract infection.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Biofeedback

One study with moderate risk of bias investigated the effects of biofeedback with CPM compared with CPM without biofeedback.34 Pain was less in the intervention group over 5 PODs.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Neurostimulation

Four studies with 443 participants examined the effect of external electrical stimulation modes.20,36,41,43 One study with high risk of bias favored neurostimulation using interactive, varying stimulation parameters in addition to “standard rehabilitation” over “standard rehabilitation” for pain and active knee flexion.20 No effect of intervention on knee swelling was observed. Adverse events were not reported. Another study with moderate risk of bias applied neuromodulated stimulation near the surgical site and reported greater reductions in pain compared with sham treatment.43 Skin irritation under the electrodes was noted in 1 participant. One study with low risk of bias examined the effects of transcutaneous nerve stimulation.41 When compared with placebo transcutaneous nerve stimulation, less pain with knee extension and lower pressure pain threshold at the knee was reported. When compared with no intervention, less pain with knee extension and with gait was reported. One study with low risk of bias reported nonsignificant results for the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation over sham treatment on pain and mood.36 No adverse events were reported.

Back to Top | Article Outline

“Physical Therapy” Interventions

Thirty-one studies (excluding the systematic reviews) clearly combined some form of “physical therapy” or exercise intervention with the intervention under study,18–20,23–33,35,38,40–46,48,49,52–57 and in most of those studies, a comparison group received similar physical therapy interventions.19,20,23–33,35,38,40–42,44–46,48,49,52–57 Of those studies, 15 reported statistically significant results for at least one of the outcome measures.20,23,24,27,29–31,35,40,41,43,44,49,53,54 The actual type, intensity, and duration of physical therapy interventions were not clearly stated in many of the studies. Twenty-seven studies included gait training as part of the intervention18–20,23–28,30–32,35,38,40,42,44–46,48,49,52–57; 14 reported including transfer training19,20,27,30,42,44–46,52–57; 22 studies included active ROM exercises of the operative knee18–20,26,27,30,32,35,38,42,44–46,48,49,52–57; and 9 reported passive ROM of the knee18,19,31,38,40,42,44,46,52 as part of the intervention. Four studies examined the effect of the same program of physical therapy intervention initiated at an earlier time postoperatively than the comparison group, or offered more often than in the comparison group.19,23,52,53 Three studies reported starting some form of physical therapy intervention within 24 hours of surgery.19,40,53 Sixteen studies included physical therapy interventions on “POD 1.”18–20,23,26,27,29–33,38,42,44,49,52,54,56 All studies reporting the frequency of physical therapy interventions included 1 to 2 times per day.

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCUSSION

Principal Findings

Our search resulted in very few randomized clinical trials or systematic reviews with low risk of bias that addressed our question. We found insufficient evidence for the effectiveness of most of the interventions examined in the various studies. Results of 2 systematic reviews suggest that cryotherapy may reduce early postoperative pain and improve ROM; however, the authors of both systematic reviews noted that the level of evidence supporting their conclusion was very low.50,51 We found very low level of evidence supporting early or enhanced rehabilitation to improve knee ROM and walking ability and reduce length of stay. The 5 studies supporting this conclusion comprised only 2 randomized controlled trials.40,53 The other studies included retrospective data analyses,23 comparison with a historic sample,25 or lacked true randomization.24 We also found very low level evidence for the use of neurostimulation for reduction of pain when electrodes were placed near the surgical site.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Possible Explanations

A majority of studies stated that the participants in both the intervention and comparison groups received some form of physical therapy or rehabilitation intervention, and in a majority of studies, such interventions were noted to start within 1 POD. Possibly, the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of most of the studied interventions is due to similar management of the intervention and comparison groups, and that changes in the outcomes studied are largely effected by various forms of interventions suggested by the term “physical therapy” or “standard care.” In addition, all study participants likely received medical pain management of some type. One plausible explanation is that combined mobility and pain management, regardless of the form, are responsible for positive changes in function and activity during the acute postoperative phase of TKA. Another factor resulting in nonsignificant results may be the very short lengths of stay in the acute care setting, resulting in small changes and thereby, small differences between groups in the outcomes. One final factor is that research in the acute care setting can be extremely challenging because of the difficulty controlling for all the variables that may influence outcomes that affect function.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Study

To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of literature that addresses the effects of physical therapy interventions for patients with TKA, specifically in the acute care setting. The literature review was conducted by a team of reviewers with both research and clinical expertise, and the search process was supported by a skilled medical librarian. Outcomes that were not directly related to impairments of physical function or restriction in activities or participation were not examined. For example, some studies or data that were excluded reported amount of pain medication, amount of wound drainage, or other such medical outcomes that may have been affected by the interventions. We also examined literature over the past 20 years, a period in which significant changes in surgical procedures and pain management have occurred, positively affecting outcomes for all patients regardless of postoperative management. Risk of bias may be assessed in a variety of ways and a variety of terms may be used. We chose to provide qualitative descriptions of the risks of bias based on categories of potential bias.58 A different approach may have resulted in differing assessments.

Limitations of this study include the fact that only studies reported in English were reviewed. Also, authors were not contacted to determine the existence of unpublished data. Only studies found in peer-reviewed literature and that were available in full text were included. The search was not limited to randomized controlled trials; however, studies that were not randomized controlled trials were assessed as having a higher risk of bias. This search was limited to 3 major databases and we may have possibly missed relevant articles published in nonindexed journals; however, a skilled medical librarian was part of our review team, enhancing the probability that this search was effective. Because of the heterogeneous nature of the studies in terms of methods, interventions, and outcomes, a meta-analysis was not performed.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Clinical Implications

For patients with TKA in the acute care setting, very low-level evidence supports (1) cryotherapy early in the postoperative phase for reducing pain over other physical therapy interventions; (2) early, aggressive mobility interventions for improving ROM and walking ability rather than less aggressive approach; and (3) neurostimulation for reduction of pain over placebo or no neurostimulation. However, the effect of these interventions is uncertain due to the limitations of the studies. The evidence is insufficient to support any of the other intervention over a variety of comparison treatments. Given the state of the evidence, physical therapists will need to rely on empirical evidence and physiologically plausible rationale for selecting type, intensity, frequency, and duration of interventions. In addition, given the likely symbiotic relationship between pain management and physical therapy interventions, peri- and postoperative medical management may have important effects on the immediate gains in patients' function after TKA that cannot be separated from the effects of interventions provided by physical therapists.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Implications for Future Research

More rigorous randomized controlled trials and better organized studies are needed in which the intervention and comparison groups receive treatments that do not have so much in common, such as CPM or exercise. Such an approach may be difficult, given that exercise and mobility intervention are commonly viewed as standard care for individuals following TKA. In addition, to improve reproducibility of results, studies must include a more detailed description of the interventions reported as “physical therapy” or “standard care.” Tracking the degree of improvement related to interventions is also important in future studies. This would allow for comparisons of interventions and analysis of the effect size of the intervention relative to the main outcomes found in the literature. This would help therapists select and prioritize treatments.

Furthermore, longer-term outcome studies with reports of the interventions from the acute care setting are needed. Finally, because the outcomes after TKA in the acute care setting are likely the result of multiple types of interventions provided by physicians, nurses, and rehabilitation professionals, studies must control for these factors in a systematic manner. Future research should include studies of units dedicated to care of patients with TKA, timing of rehabilitation interventions, day of surgery interventions, and functional targets and goals necessary to achieve prior to hospital discharge. All of these may directly effect the patient's early discharge from the acute care setting and are independent of the surgical advances in this population.

Back to Top | Article Outline

CONCLUSION

This systematic review of literature indicates very low-level evidence that supports (1) cryotherapy for reducing pain, (2) accelerated rehabilitation for improving ROM and walking, and (3) neurostimulation for reduction of pain in the acute care setting after TKA.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Tian W, DeJong G, Brown M, Hsieh CH, Zamfirov ZP, Horn SD. Looking upstream: factors shaping the demand for postacute joint replacement rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(8):1260–1268.
2. Ethgen O, Bruyere O, Richy F, Dardennes C, Reginster JY. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86A(5):963–974.
3. Jones CA, Beaupre LA, Johnston DW, Suarez-Almazor ME. Total joint arthroplasties: current concepts of patient outcomes after surgery. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2007;33(1):71–86.
4. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model. https://innovation.cms.gov/initiatives/CJR. Accessed August 2, 2016.
5. Maradit Kremers H, Larson DR, Crowson CS, et al Prevalence of total hip and knee replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(17): 1386–1397.
6. Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) Model. Provider and technical fact sheet. https://innovation.cms.gov/Files/fact-sheet/cjr-providerfs-finalrule.pdf. Accessed August 2, 2016.
7. Freburger JK, Heatwole Shank K, Knauer SR, Montmeny RM. Delivery of physical therapy in the acute care setting: a population-based study. Phys Ther. 2012;92(2):251–265.
8. Stryla W, Pogorzala AM, Rogala P, Nowakowski A. Algorithm of physical therapy exercises following total hip arthroplasty. Pol Orthop Traumatol. 2013;78:33–39.
9. Styron JF, Barsoum WK, Smyth KA, Singer ME. Preoperative predictors of returning to work following primary total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(1):2–10.
10. Lingard EA, Berven S, Katz JN, Kinemax Outcomes G. Management and care of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: variations across different health care settings. Arthritis Care Res. 2000;13(3):129–136.
11. Naylor J, Harmer A, Fransen M, Crosbie J, Innes L. Status of physiotherapy rehabilitation after total knee replacement in Australia. Physiother Res Int. 2006;11(1):35–47.
12. Roos EM. Effectiveness and practice variation of rehabilitation after joint replacement. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2003;15(2):160–162.
13. Mizner RL, Petterson SC, Snyder-Mackler L. Quadriceps strength and the time course of functional recovery after total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005;35(7):424–436.
14. Husted H, Lunn TH, Troelsen A, Gaarn-Larsen L, Kristensen BB, Kehlet H. Why still in hospital after fast-track hip and knee arthroplasty? Acta Orthop. 2011;82(6):679–684.
15. Chan EY, Blyth FM, Nairn L, Fransen M. Acute postoperative pain following hospital discharge after total knee arthroplasty. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2013;21(9):1257–1263.
16. Lowe CJM, Barker KL, Dewey M, Sackley CM. Effectiveness of physiotherapy exercise after knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2007;335(7624):812.
17. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10–17.
18. Kim TK, Park KK, Yoon SW, Kim SJ, Chang CB, Seong SC. Clinical value of regular passive ROM exercise by a physical therapist after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009;17(10):1152–1158.
19. Lang CE. Comparison of 6- and 7-day physical therapy coverage on length of stay and discharge outcome for individuals with total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28(1):15–22.
20. Nigam AK, Taylor DM, Valeyeva Z. Non-invasive interactive neurostimulation (InterX) reduces acute pain in patients following total knee replacement surgery: a randomised, controlled trial. J Orthop Surg Res. 2011;6:45–56.
21. Pope RO, Corcoran S, McCaul K, Howie DW. Continuous passive motion after primary total knee arthroplasty. Does it offer any benefits? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(6):914–917.
22. Pongkunakorn A, Sawatphap D. Use of drop and dangle rehabilitation protocol to increase knee flexion following total knee arthroplasty: a comparison with continuous passive motion machine. J Med Assoc Thai. 2014;97(suppl 9):S16–S22.
23. Pua YA, Ong P-H. Association of early ambulation with length of stay and costs in total knee arthroplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;93(11):962–970.
24. Renkawitz T, Rieder M, Handel M, Koller M, Drescher J, Bonnlaender G. Comparison of two accelerated clinical pathways-after total knee replacement how fast can we really go? Clin Rehabil. 2010;24:230–239.
25. Starks I, Wainwright TW, Lewis J, Lloyd J, Middleton RG. Older patients have the most to gain from orthopaedic enhanced recovery programmes. Age Ageing. 2014;43(5):642–648.
26. Thienpont E. Does advanced cryotherapy reduce pain and narcotic consumption after knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(11):3417–3423.
27. Bennett LA, Brearley SC, Hart JAL, Bailey MJ. A comparison of 2 continuous passive motion protocols after total knee arthroplasty: a controlled and randomized study. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20(2):225–233.
28. Alkire MR, Swank ML. Use of inpatient continuous passive motion versus no CPM in computer-assisted total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Nurs. 2010;29(1):36–40.
29. Alaca N, Atalay A, Guven Z. Comparison of the long-term effectiveness of progressive neuromuscular facilitation and continuous passive motion therapies after total knee arthroplasty. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27(11):3377–3380.
30. Boese CK, Weis M, Phillips T, Lawton-Peters S, Gallo T, Centeno L. The efficacy of continuous passive motion after total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of three protocols. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;29(6):1158–1162.
31. Lau CE, Chiu KY. Use of continuous passive motion after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16(3):336–339.
32. Leach W, Reid J, Murphy F. Continuous passive motion following total knee replacement: a prospective randomized trial with follow-up to 1 year. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14(10):922–926.
33. Pereira LC, Jolles BM. The effect of end-of-range grade A+ knee mobilisation following acute primary total knee arthroplasty: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Ther Rehabil. 2015;22(12):583–591.
34. Wang T-J, Chang C-F, Lou MF, et al Biofeedback relaxation for pain associated with continuous passive motion in Taiwanese patients after total knee arthroplasty. Res Nurs Health. 2015;38(1):39–50.
35. Yang T-H, Yeh W-L, Chen H-Y, Chen Y-F, Ni K-C, Lee K-H. Compare the Traditional Chinese Medicine manipulation with rehabilitation on in-patients after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(6):954–959.
36. Borckardt JJ, Reeves ST, Robinson SM, et al Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) reduces postsurgical opioid consumption in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Clin J Pain. 2013;29(11):925–928.
37. He BJ, Tong PJ, Li J, Jing HT, Yao XM. Auricular acupressure for analgesia in perioperative period of total knee arthroplasty. Pain Med. 2013;14(10):1608–1613.
38. Tsang RC-C, Tsang P-L, Ko C-Y, Kong BC-H, Lee W-Y, Yip H-T. Effects of acupuncture and sham acupuncture in addition to physiotherapy in patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty—a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2007;21(8):719–728.
39. Chang L-H, C-H Hsu, Jong G-P, Ho S, Tsay S-l, Lin K-C. Auricular acupressure for managing postoperative pain and knee motion in patients with total knee replacement: a randomized sham control study. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2012;2012:1–7.
40. den Hertog A, Gliesche K, Timm J, Muhlbauer B, Zebrowski S. Pathway-controlled fast-track rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized prospective clinical study evaluating the recovery pattern, drug consumption, and length of stay. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012;132(8):1153–1163.
41. Rakel BA, Zimmerman MB, Geasland K, et al Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for the control of pain during rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Pain. 2014;155(12):2599–2611.
42. Zietek P, Zietek J, Szczypior K, Safranow K. Effect of adding one 15-minute-walk on the day of surgery to fast-track rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, single-blind study. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015;51(3):245–252.
43. Wanich T, Gelber J, Rodeo S, Windsor R. Percutaneous neuromodulation pain therapy following knee replacement. J Knee Surg. 2011;24(3):197–202.
44. Mau-Moeller A, Behrens M, Finze S, Bruhn S, Bader R, Mittelmeier W. The effect of continuous passive motion and sling exercise training on clinical and functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty: a randomized active-controlled clinical study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):68–78.
45. Demoulin C, Brouwers M, Darot S, Gillet P, Crielaard JM, Vanderthommen M. Comparison of gaseous cryotherapy with more traditional forms of cryotherapy following total knee arthroplasty. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2012;55(4):229–240.
46. Maniar RN, Baviskar JV, Singhi T, Rathi SS. To use or not to use continuous passive motion post-total knee arthroplasty presenting functional assessment results in early recovery. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(2):193–200. e191.
47. Munk S, Jensen NJF, Andersen I, Kehlet H, Hansen TB. Effect of compression therapy on knee swelling and pain after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(2):388–392.
48. Pichonnaz C, Bassin J-P, Lécureux E, et al Effect of manual lymphatic drainage after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(5):674–682.
49. Yashar AA, Venn-Watson E, Welsh T, Colwell CW Jr, Lotke P. Continuous passive motion with accelerated flexion after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997(345):38–43.
50. Adie S, Kwan A, Naylor JM, Harris IA, Mittal R. Cryotherapy following total knee replacement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(9):CD007911.
51. Ni S-H, Jiang W-T, Guo L, et al Cryotherapy on postoperative rehabilitation of joint arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(11):3354–3361.
52. Lenssen AF, Crijns YHF, Waltje EMH, et al Efficiency of immediate postoperative inpatient physical therapy following total knee arthroplasty: an RCT. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:71–80.
53. Labraca NS, Castro-Sanchez AM, Mataran-Penarrocha GA, Arroyo-Morales M, Sanchez-Joya Mdel M, Moreno-Lorenzo C. Benefits of starting rehabilitation within 24 hours of primary total knee arthroplasty: randomized clinical trial. Clin Rehabil. 2011;25(6):557–566.
54. Ebert JR, Joss B, Jardine B, Wood DJ. Randomized trial investigating the efficacy of manual lymphatic drainage to improve early outcome after total knee arthroplasty. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(11):2103–2111.
55. Beaupre LA, Davies DM, Jones CA, Cinats JG. Exercise combined with continuous passive motion or slider board therapy compared with exercise only: a randomized controlled trial of patients following total knee arthroplasty. Phys Ther. 2001;81(4):1029–1037.
56. Bruun-Olsen V, Heiberg KE, Mengshoel AM. Continuous passive motion as an adjunct to active exercises in early rehabilitation following total knee arthroplasty—a randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(4):277–283.
57. Denis M, Moffet H, Caron F, Ouellet D, Paquet J, Nolet L. Effectiveness of continuous passive motion and conventional physical therapy after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2006;86(2):174–185.
58. Viswahathan M, Ansari MT, Berkman ND, et al Assessing the Risk of Bias of Individual Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health care Interventions. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews; 2012. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov. Accessed March 29, 2017.

Supplemental Digital Content

Back to Top | Article Outline
© 2018 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.