High-Intensity Progressive Rehabilitation Versus Routine Rehabilitation After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of high-intensity progressive rehabilitation training with routine training in the early treatment of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

There were 78 patients who underwent total knee arthroplasty and were randomized into high-intensity progressive training and routine rehabilitation training groups (RRT). The primary outcome measures were the American Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Score (HSS), with secondary outcomes including patient satisfaction, visual analog pain score, first time of standing after surgery, 6-minute walk test, 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and length of hospital stay. The incidence of postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

The HSS scores were higher in the intervention group at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 12 months postoperatively (P < .001). The RRT group had higher visual analog pain scores than the intervention group at 24 hours, 3 days, and 2 weeks after surgery (P < .001). The intervention group had an earlier the first time of standing after surgery and a longer 6-minute walk test distance (P < .001, P = .028, P < .001, P < .001). Patient satisfaction was higher in the intervention group, with a higher quality of life rating at 3 months postoperatively (P < .001). However, 1 year after surgery, the 2 groups had no significant differences in mental component summaries. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the intervention group than in the RRT group.

CONCLUSION

Compared to routine training, high-intensity progressive rehabilitation training is more effective. It reduces postoperative patient pain, accelerates recovery of joint function, increases patient satisfaction, improves quality of life, shortens hospital stays, and promotes rapid recovery.