Efficacy of Combined Antigravity Treadmill and Conventional Rehabilitation After Hip Fracture in Patients With Sarcopenia

• Published in: The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2020-10, Vol.75 (10), p.e173-e181
• Main Authors: Oh, Min-Kyun, Yoo, Jun-Il, Byun, Hayoung, Chun, Se-Woong, Lim, Seung-Kyu, Jang, Yun Jeong, Lee, Chang Han
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Balance; Exercise Therapy - methods; Female; Geriatric Assessment; Hip; Hip Fractures - rehabilitation; Hip Fractures - surgery; Hip joint; Humans; Long-term effects; Male; Patients; Quality of life; Rehabilitation; Sarcopenia; Sarcopenia - complications; Surgery; Walking; Womens health
• ISSN: 1079-5006; 1758-535X
• DOI: 10.1093/gerona/glaa158

Abstract Background To compare long-term effects of antigravity treadmill (AGT) combined with conventional rehabilitation (CR) and CR after hip fracture in patients with sarcopenia. Methods Forty-five patients were randomly allocated to AGT combined with CR (experimental group) or CR (control group) for 10 consecutive working days. Participants were evaluated prior to treatment, 3 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after treatment. Outcome measurement included Koval walking ability scores functional ambulatory category (FAC), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Korean version of Mini-Mental State Examination, Euro Quality of Life Questionnaire Five-Dimensional Classification, Korean version of modified Barthel index, and grip strength. Results At 3 weeks and 3 months, the comparison of change scores in KOVAL between two groups revealed difference of 0.84 (95% CI: −1.19, −0.49; p for trend = .000) and 1.21 (95% CI: −2.05, −0.36; p for trend = .006), respectively. At 3 weeks, comparison of change score in FAC between two groups revealed a difference of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.19; p for trend = .003). The comparison of change scores between two groups also showed a difference in the 6 months in KOVAL and in the 3 and 6 months in FAC. The comparison of changes in scores in BBS between two groups revealed difference of 11.63 (95% CI: 5.85, 17.40; p for trend = .001), 9.00 (95% CI: 2.28, 15.71; p for trend = .006), and 11.05 (95% CI: 3.62, 18.48; p for trend = .006), respectively, at each follow-up. Conclusions Both groups were improved after intervention. As additional benefits were evident among those who carried out AGT, it may be appropriate for patients with sarcopenia after hip fracture surgery.