ArticleMusculoskeletal care2022
Understanding prescribed dose in hand strengthening exercise for rheumatoid arthritis: A secondary analysis of the SARAH trial.
Article in Musculoskeletal care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rheumatoid arthritis treatment: Is exercise a game changer?Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2024Review
- Understanding prescribed dose in hand strengthening exercise for rheumatoid arthritis: A secondary analysis of the SARAH trial.Musculoskeletal care · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objective1) To identify therapist or participant characteristics associated with prescribed dose of hand strengthening exercise in adults with rheumatoid arthritis and 2) To determine the impact of dose prescribed on outcome (hand function and grip strength).
methodsOverall dose was calculated using area under the curve (AUC). Analysis 1 assessed the association between therapist professional background, therapist grade, baseline participant physical and psychological characteristics and prescribed dose. Analyses 2 and 3 estimated the relationship between prescribed dose and overall hand function and grip strength. Generalised estimating equation linear regression analysis was used.
resultsAnalysis 1: Being treated by an occupational therapist (β = -297.0, 95% CI -398.6, -195.4), metacarpophalangeal joint deformity (β = -24.1, 95% CI -42.3, -5.9), a higher number of swollen wrist/hand joints (β = -11.4, 95% CI -21.6, -1.2) and the participant feeling downhearted and low all of the time (β = -293.6, 95% CI -436.1, -151.1) were associated with being prescribed a lower dose. Being treated by a grade 6 therapist (β = 159.1, 95% CI 65.7, 252.5), higher baseline grip strength (β = 0.15, 95% CI 0.02, 0.28) and greater participant confidence to exercise without fear of making symptoms worse (β = 18.9, 95% CI 1.5, 36.3) were associated with being prescribed a higher dose. Analyses 2 and 3: Higher dose was associated with greater overall hand function (β = 0.005, 95% CI 0.001, 0.010) and full-hand grip strength (β = 0.014, 95% CI 0.000, 0.025) at 4-month.
conclusionHigher dose was associated with better clinical outcomes. Prescription of hand strengthening exercise is associated with both therapist and participant characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.