MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was an open-label randomized controlled trial of six weeks. Forty overweight and obese participants with knee OA were randomly divided into two groups by a computer-generated number. The participants in the Instruction Group (IG) were provided with leaflets explaining IDC for the duration of six weeks. Both groups were instructed to take low doses of the non-steroid anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDs) on alternate days. The outcome measures were pain, mobility and BMI. The feasibility and acceptability of knee pain and mobility were assessed using a questionnaire designed by experts in rehabilitation.

RESULTS: Participants in the IG reported more statistically significant pain relief as assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score (p=0.001) and improvement in mobility (p=0.000) assessed by the Timed Up and Go test score after six weeks compared to the Control Group (CG). Both groups did not demonstrate any significant change in BMI (p-value > 0.05). The results of descriptive statistics showed a significantly higher satisfaction score for participants who received a combination of IDC and NSAIDs, indicating an acceptable intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients were recruited from the urban community of Lahore, Pakistan. The patients were divided into the rehabilitation group (RG) and control group (CG). The patients in the RG performed the REs of lower limbs and followed the instructions of daily care (IDC), while the patients in the CG only followed the IDC for a 12 weeks period. Outcome measures were assessed at pre-test before grouping and post-test after 12-weeks of interventions. The measures included: weight, functional strength, and exercise adherence. The Paired Samples t-test (for normally distributed data) and the Wilcoxon Signed Ranked Test (for data that was not normally distributed) were used to analyze the differences within groups from pre to post-test measurements. The variance 2 × 2 factors and the Mann Whitney U-test were used to analyze the difference in weight and functional strength between the groups.

RESULTS: The patients in the RG reported a statistically significant weight reduction (p < 0.001) and improvement in the functional strength (p < 0.001) within a group. Similarly, the patients in the CG also reported a significant improvement in the scores of functional strength (p = 0.004) within a group. The improvement in the scores of functional strength was higher in the patients of RG than the CG (p < 0.001). Similarly, the patients in the RG reported a statistically significant reduction in weight than the CG (p < 0.001).

METHODS: Patients aged 50 years and over hospitalised with a vertebral fragility fracture from 1/2/2016 to 31/1/2017 were identified from radiology and hospital records. Patients sustaining vertebral fractures due to either major trauma or malignancy were excluded. Data was collected on patient demographics, fracture details, hospitalisation details and health outcomes.

RESULTS: 208 patients with acute vertebral fragility fractures were hospitalised over a 12 month period. The mean (SD) age was 80.5 (11) years, of which 68% were female. 94% presented to the Emergency Department (ED) as their first point of contact, of which 70% were subsequently hospitalised. Two-thirds presented with a single level vertebral fracture predominantly around the thoracolumbar region. The majority (87%) were non-operatively managed by general physicians, of which most were under Geriatric Medicine. The median length of stay was 12 (IQR 6-20) days and inpatient mortality was 3%. 52% of patients went on to have a bone health assessment.