Basic Body Awareness Therapy versus standard care in hip osteoarthritis. A randomized controlled trial

Background Compensational movement patterns in hip osteoarthritis (HOA) are associated with hip dysfunction. Basic Body Awareness Therapy (BBAT) promotes functional movement quality and might, accordingly, be beneficial in HOA. Objective To examine the outcomes of BBAT compared to standard care in p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy 2022-01, Vol.27 (1), p.e1930-n/a
Main Authors: Olsen, Aarid Liland, Magnussen, Liv Heide, Skjaerven, Liv Helvik, Assmus, Jörg, Sundal, Mary‐Anne, Furnes, Ove, Hallan, Geir, Strand, Liv Inger
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Activities of Daily Living
Adult
Exercise Therapy
hip osteoarthritis
Humans
learning
movement
Osteoarthritis, Hip - therapy
physiotherapy
Prospective Studies
Quality of Life
randomized controlled trial
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Compensational movement patterns in hip osteoarthritis (HOA) are associated with hip dysfunction. Basic Body Awareness Therapy (BBAT) promotes functional movement quality and might, accordingly, be beneficial in HOA. Objective To examine the outcomes of BBAT compared to standard care in people with HOA after first receiving patient education (PE). Study Design A prospective, assessor‐blinded, and block‐randomized controlled trial. Methods Community‐living adults with HOA participating in PE were randomly allocated to an intervention group receiving BBAT in groups (12 sessions offered once a week), or a comparison group. Data at baseline (pretest) and at 6 months (posttest) were analyzed. Primary outcomes were pain during walking assessed by the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and function by the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, subscale ADL (HOOS A). Secondary outcomes addressed physical capacity, movement quality, and self‐reported aspects of function and health. Results At pretest, there were no significant differences in demographic and test data between the intervention (n = 51) and the comparison (n = 50) group. Forty‐one intervention and 45 comparison participants completed the posttest. At posttest, no significant differences in change between groups were found on NRS (p = 0.694, effect size (ES) = 0.02) or HOOS A (p = 0.783, ES = 0.07). Among secondary outcomes, movement quality improved significantly more (p 
ISSN:1358-2267
1471-2865
DOI:10.1002/pri.1930