ANZCTR - Registration

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers

Trial registered on ANZCTR

Registration number

ACTRN12621000846820

Ethics application status

Approved

Date submitted

16/05/2021

Date registered

1/07/2021

Date last updated

6/06/2022

Date data sharing statement initially provided

1/07/2021

Type of registration

Prospectively registered

Titles & IDs

Public title

Comparison of a Physiotherapy versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy (ESWT) for treatment of Hamstring Tendon pain.

Scientific title

A Pilot Randomised Trial Comparing Individualised Physiotherapy versus Shockwave Therapy for Proximal Hamstring Tendinopathy

Secondary ID [1]

None

Universal Trial Number (UTN)

U1111-1261-8019

Trial acronym

Linked study record

Health condition

Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:

Proximal Hamstring Tendinopathy

Condition category

Condition code

Musculoskeletal

Other muscular and skeletal disorders

Physical Medicine / Rehabilitation

Physiotherapy

Intervention/exposure

Study type

Interventional

Description of intervention(s) / exposure

PHYSIOTHERAPY intervention
Intervention in the individualised PHYSIOTHERAPY group will relate to known or hypothesised mechanisms underpinning the condition and have been informed by treatment shown to be effective in other lower limb tendinopathies. A key component of the program is a multi-stage, graded, individualised, strengthening/rehabilitation program, with consideration given to sporting and occupational demands. Graded reintroduction of compressive forces in loading programs is recommended for PHT and other lower limb tendinopathies and will be incorporated in the individualised PHYSIOTHERAPY treatment algorithms.
Pain monitoring, both during and latent to loading, is a key component of the program. Use of a pain ‘ceiling’ during rehabilitation is thought to provide a safe guideline for exercise loads and avoids the need for a prolonged period of rest in which only pain free activity is allowed. A significant increase in symptoms lasting over 24 hours after activity is thought to indicate excessive loading of the tendon although the biological mechanism of this response is unknown.
Stage 1 of the PHYSIOTHERAPY intervention will comprise isometric hamstring exercise aiming to safely commencing strengthening the hamstring complex and reduce pain levels. Stage 2 will incorporate progressive isotonic strengthening exercises of the hamstring musculature. Later stages will add strengthening of agonist muscles (calf, hip extensors, hip abductors and adductor magnus), and reintroduction of compressive load by increasing the hip flexion angle of hamstring strengthening exercises. High speed (energy storage and release) exercises will be included if required for the participant. Exercises options that are specific to sporting/occupational demands will be chosen where possible. Retraining of lower limb kinetic chain movements (e.g. lunge, squat, running) and lumbopelvic control rehabilitation will be incorporated if indicated by the assessment of the treating physiotherapist in line with recommendations for other lower limb tendinopathies. Progression to later stages of the program will be criteria driven with emphasis on absence of latent pain increase from rehabilitation. Return to sport advice will be provided. The treatment protocols have been developed by the research team including a clinical/research expert in this area (JC)

The duration of the intervention is 12 weeks, with sessions provided at 0, 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 weeks after randomisation. The first session is 60 minutes, and the remainder 30 minutes. All sessions will be undertaken in a one to one format in a physiotherapy clinic.

Participating physiotherapists and treatment fidelity
Physiotherapists from private practices in Victoria will provide treatment for both groups. To be eligible, the physiotherapists will need to have at least 2 years of clinical experience. Physiotherapists will then participate in a small group, 4-hour training session provided by the lead researcher (AR). The program will include review of previously provided material, and simulation of explanations and treatments to be used in the trial.
Treating physiotherapists will be provided with a treatment manual (designed specifically for this study) detailing treatment algorithms, protocols and participant information sheets. Treatment methods will be clearly defined and standardised via a detailed session-by-session electronic clinical notes template that contains a series of decision-making algorithms. The algorithms and clinical notes will ensure that essential elements of the treatment program are consistently applied by all physiotherapists across all participants, while still allowing some opportunity for the treatment to be tailored to individual participants. The template will require treating physiotherapists to provide objective assessment findings, justification and rationale for clinical decision making, detail of treatment provision/prescription and response to treatment. Physiotherapists will be required to complete electronic clinical notes for each session which detail assessment findings, treatment provided, clinical decision-making justification and any adverse events from shockwave treatment or the exercise program.
A quarterly face-to-face (or online if required due to COVID restrictions) meeting will be undertaken for 60 minutes involving all treating physiotherapists for the duration of the trial to review de-identified cases in the context of the treatment protocol. Evaluation of treatment fidelity and adherence by the physiotherapists for specific rehabilitation techniques will be achieved by checking the physiotherapist’s clinical notes for each participant after the second and fourth sessions of the program.

Intervention code [1]

Rehabilitation

Comparator / control treatment

SHOCKWAVE intervention

Intervention in the SHOCKWAVE group will follow the approach of Cacchio et al 2011 consisting of four sessions of ESWT in accordance with a standardised protocol. The final two sessions will be used to review relevant information sheets and plan for return to normal activities.
Although the trial by Cacchio et al used only radial shockwave, both radial (EMS Swiss Dolorclast, Milano, Italy) and semi-focused shockwave (Dornier, Germany) will be used given previous research has found no difference in outcomes between the two different devices in tendinopathy. Shockwave dosage will be 2000 shocks per session at the highest tolerable intensity which appears to be a safe and effective dose.

The duration of the intervention is 12 weeks, with sessions provided at 0, 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 weeks after randomisation. Shockwave will be provided in the first 4 sessions only. The final two sessions (at week 6 and 12) are used to review previous education, and plan for return to sport and other previously provocative activities. The first session is 60 minutes, and the remainder 30 minutes. All sessions will be undertaken in a one to one format in a physiotherapy clinic.

Participating physiotherapists and treatment fidelity
Physiotherapists from private practices in Victoria will provide treatment for both groups. To be eligible, the physiotherapists will need to have at least 2 years of clinical experience. Physiotherapists will then participate in a small group, 4-hour training session provided by the lead researcher (AR). The program will include review of previously provided material, and simulation of explanations and treatments to be used in the trial.
Treating physiotherapists will be provided with a treatment manual detailing treatment algorithms, protocols and participant information sheets. Treatment methods will be clearly defined and standardised via a detailed session-by-session electronic clinical notes template that contains a series of decision-making algorithms. The algorithms and clinical notes will ensure that essential elements of the treatment program are consistently applied by all physiotherapists across all participants, while still allowing some opportunity for the treatment to be tailored to individual participants. The template will require treating physiotherapists to provide objective assessment findings, justification and rationale for clinical decision making, detail of treatment provision/prescription and response to treatment. Physiotherapists will be required to complete electronic clinical notes for each session which detail assessment findings, treatment provided, clinical decision-making justification and any adverse events from shockwave treatment or the exercise program.
A quarterly face-to-face meeting will be undertaken for 60 minutes involving all treating physiotherapists for the duration of the trial to review de-identified cases in the context of the treatment protocol. Evaluation of treatment fidelity and adherence by the physiotherapists for specific rehabilitation techniques will be achieved by checking the physiotherapist’s clinical notes for each participant after the second and fourth sessions of the program.

Control group

Active

Outcomes

Primary outcome [1]

Global rating of change
Metric/Method of measurement: A 7-point Likert scale, with participants rating their overall change from baseline.

Timepoint [1]

12 weeks after randomisation

Primary outcome [2]

Severity of hamstring tendon symptoms
Metric/Method of measurement: Victorian Institute of Sport – Hamstring questionnaire (VISA-H).

Timepoint [2]

12 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [1]

Global rating of change
Metric/Method of measurement: A 7-point Likert scale, with participants rating their overall change from baseline.

Timepoint [1]

4, 26 and 52 weeks post randomisation

Secondary outcome [2]

Severity of hamstring tendon symptoms
Metric/Method of measurement: Victorian Institute of Sport – Hamstring questionnaire (VISA-H).

Timepoint [2]

4, 26 and 52 weeks post randomisation

Secondary outcome [3]

Sitting tolerance
Metric/Method of measurement: Patient Specific Functional Scale

Timepoint [3]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [4]

Functional restrictions
Metric/method of measurement: modified Physical Activity Level Scale.

Timepoint [4]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [5]

Eccentric hamstring strength
Metric/method of measurement: NordBoard (Vald Performance, Albion Queensland)

Timepoint [5]

12 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [6]

Psychosocial risk factors
Metric/method of measurement: Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire

Timepoint [6]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [7]

Kinesiophobia
Metric/method of measurement: modified Tampa scale

Timepoint [7]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [8]

Severity of symptoms
Metric/method of measurement: Numerical pain rating scale

Timepoint [8]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [9]

Self-reported adherence to rehabilitation
Metric/method of measurement: Exercise Adherence Rating Scale

Timepoint [9]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [10]

Satisfaction with treatment:
Metric/method of measurement: 5 point Likert scale

Timepoint [10]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [11]

Satisfaction with results of treatment:
Metric/method of measurement: 5 point Likert scale

Timepoint [11]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [12]

Quality of life
Metric/method of measurement: EuroQoL-5D

Timepoint [12]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Secondary outcome [13]

Pain Catastrophization

Metric/method of measurement: Pain Catastrophizing Scale

Timepoint [13]

4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation

Eligibility

Key inclusion criteria

Inclusion Criteria

Initial Phone Screening
1. Reports of relatively localised (defined as an area smaller than a tennis ball) ischial tuberosity region pain of gradual onset and at least 3 months in duration.
2. Willingness to participate in six sessions of intervention over a 12-week period.
3. Age between 18 and 65 inclusive.
4. Fluency in English sufficient to complete questionnaires and to enable understanding to the intervention.
5. Agreeing to refrain from other interventions for the treatment period of the trial, aside from consultation with medical practitioners, and medication.
6. Planned absence for a period of >2 weeks during the treatment period (such as overseas holiday).

Clinical examination screening
7. A clear increase in activity levels precipitating onset of symptoms determined based on clinical interview.
8. Positive findings (reproduction of lower buttock pain) with three or more of four diagnostic criteria:
o Single-leg arabesque
o Supine single leg bridge with heel on standardised height platform (bent knee)
o Self reported PHT symptoms with prolonged sitting <30 minutes.
o Modified bent-knee hamstring stretch test.

Minimum age

18 Years

Maximum age

65 Years

Sex

Both males and females

Can healthy volunteers participate?

Key exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Initial Phone Screening
1. Previous surgery to the hamstring complex, as we wish to study treatment effects independent to the effects of surgical procedures.
2. Previous injection to the hamstring tendon within the previous 6 weeks, as we wish to study treatment effects independent to the effects of injections.
3. Treatment with ESWT for PHT in the last 3 months, as we wish to study treatment effects independent to the effects of ESWT.
4. Contraindications to receiving ESWT.
5. Current pregnancy, or recent childbirth (within 6 months) as this could impair ability to undertake testing and intervention.
6. Diagnosis with autoimmune disease as we do not wish to evaluate tendon response where there is a potential autoimmune influence
7. Already received more than two sessions of physiotherapy with any of the trial physiotherapists prior to enrolment, as these therapists are likely to use many components of the trial treatment protocol on their clinical caseload.
8. An active compensation claim for the injury, as this may have a negative influence on the response to treatment.

Clinical examination screening
9. Pain that is predominantly due to lumbar dysfunction including lumbar spine radiculopathy, or lumbar spine somatic referral
10. Pain that is reasoned from clinical examination to be predominantly due to other structures or conditions, including sciatic nerve entrapment, ischiofemoral impingement, hip joint, local sciatic nerve irritation, and adductor magnus tendinopathy

Study design

Purpose of the study

Treatment

Allocation to intervention

Randomised controlled trial

Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)

Central (offsite) allocation to groups from a computer generated allocation sequence, performed by a researcher (AH) at La Trobe University who will have no contact with volunteers or trial participants and is located remotely to the treatment clinics.

Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)

The randomisation sequence will be generated electronically using random block sizes. Randomisation will be stratified for age (<50 years of age vs >= 50 years of age), as systemic factors associated with menopause (common above this age) may influence response to some components of treatment

Masking / blinding

Blinded (masking used)

Who is / are masked / blinded?

The people assessing the outcomes
The people analysing the results/data

Intervention assignment

Parallel

Other design features

Phase

Not Applicable

Type of endpoint/s

Efficacy

Statistical methods / analysis

We aim to recruit 100 participants for this pilot trial. There are limited data for the VISA-H or other relevant outcome measures for PHT to inform sample size calculations. A sample size of 100 was therefore chosen on the basis of feasibility. A sample size of 100 would provide 80% power to detect a between-group standardised mean difference of at least 0.6 on the VISA-H, allowing for a 10% loss to follow up. This pilot RCT will provide useful data to inform sample size calculations for future trials on PHT.

Following trial completion, data from all follow-up points (4, 12, 26- and 52-weeks following randomisation) will be analysed focussing on between-group treatment effects (with 95% confidence intervals). SPSS will be used to conduct analyses. Alpha will be set at 0.05 using a two-tailed hypothesis.
Intention to treat principles will be used for all analyses; participants will be analysed based on their original allocation regardless of their adherence with treatment or number of sessions attended. Missing data will be managed by maximum likelihood estimation within linear mixed models.
Continuous data will be analysed using linear mixed models (with the group x time interaction estimating the treatment effect). Ordinal data will be analysed using the Mann Whitney U test.
A responder analysis will also be undertaken to determine the proportion of participants who achieved clinically important changes on outcome measures. For these purposes, the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) will be defined as 12 points on the VISA-H questionnaire, at least ‘much improved’ on the global rating of change scale. The MCID value for the VISA-H was used as it is similar to MCID values on other VISA scales and seemed appropriate based on the authors’ experience. For responder analyses, the risk ratio, risk difference and number needed to treat will be calculated along with 95% confidence intervals. Statistical significance for the responder analyses will be evaluated using Chi square analysis.

Recruitment

Recruitment status

Not yet recruiting

Date of first participant enrolment

Anticipated

16/08/2022

Actual

Date of last participant enrolment

Anticipated

1/08/2022

Actual

Date of last data collection

Anticipated

1/08/2023

Actual

Sample size

Target

100

Accrual to date

Final

Recruitment in Australia

Recruitment state(s)

VIC

Recruitment postcode(s) [1]

3000 - Melbourne

Funding & Sponsors

Funding source category [1]

Commercial sector/Industry

Name [1]

Advance Healthcare

Address [1]

30B East Esplanade
St Albans, Victoria, 3021

Country [1]

Australia

Primary sponsor type

University

Name

LaTrobe University

Address

Kingsbury Drive
Bundoora, Vic 3083

Country

Australia

Secondary sponsor category [1]

None

Name [1]

Address [1]

Country [1]

Ethics approval

Ethics application status

Approved

Ethics committee name [1]

La Trobe University Human Research Ethics Committee

Ethics committee address [1]

LaTrobe University
Plenty Rd &, Kingsbury Dr, Bundoora
Victoria 3086

Ethics committee country [1]

Australia

Date submitted for ethics approval [1]

30/03/2020

Approval date [1]

10/05/2021

Ethics approval number [1]

HEC21049

Summary

Brief summary

Proximal hamstring tendinopathy (PHT) is a common condition in the active and sporting population. It can also occur in less active individuals.
There is limited research regarding the efficacy of various treatment options for this condition. One study has shown improved pain and function from shockwave therapy, however the comparison group in this trial were provided with non-specific treatments as well as treatments mechanistically hypothesisied to be detrimental to this condition.
A research trial is planned to compare individualised physiotherapy to shockwave therapy for PHT.

Trial website

Trial related presentations / publications

Public notes

Contacts

Principal investigator

Name

Mr Aidan Rich

Address

La Trobe University
Kingsbury Drive
Bundoora Vic 3083

Country

Australia

Phone

+61428506126

Fax

[email protected]

Contact person for public queries

Name

Mr Aidan Rich

Address

La Trobe University
Kingsbury Drive
Bundoora Vic 3083

Country

Australia

Phone

+61428506126

Fax

[email protected]

Contact person for scientific queries

Name

Mr Aidan Rich

Address

La Trobe University
Kingsbury Drive
Bundoora Vic 3083

Country

Australia

Phone

+61428506126

Fax

[email protected]

Data sharing statement

Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?

Yes

What data in particular will be shared?

De-identified individual participant data underlying published results only will be available to be shared.

When will data be available (start and end dates)?

De-identified data will be available once study results have been published, no end date is determined.

Available to whom?

De-identified data is available to any interested parties on request.

Available for what types of analyses?

De-identified data is available for IPD meta-analyses.

How or where can data be obtained?

De-identified data can be obtained on request from the chief investigator, Andrew Hahne, email [email protected]

What supporting documents are/will be available?

Doc. No.	Type	Citation	Link	Email	Other Details	Attachment
11563	Study protocol	The study protocol is being prepared to be published.

Results publications and other study-related documents

Documents added manually

No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.

Documents added automatically

Source	Title	Year of Publication	DOI
Embase	A pilot randomised trial comparing individualised physiotherapy versus shockwave therapy for proximal hamstring tendinopathy: a protocol.	2023	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40634-023-00615-x

N.B. These documents automatically identified may not have been verified by the study sponsor.

Trial Review

Documents added manually

Documents added automatically