AB1497 THE EFFECT OF AQUATIC REHABILITATION ON QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS

Abstract

Background: In addition to its multiple functional, social and economic consequences, knee osteoarthritis is responsible for a signifcant deterioration in the quality of life (QOL)[1]. Studies examining the impact of osteoarthritis on quality of life have been made possible through the development of validated measurement questionnaires. The SF-12 score with its aspects (physical, mental and social) is a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of QOL. Objectives: The main aim of our study was to make a comparison between the contribution of aquatic rehabilitation and classic rehabilitation in patients with knee osteoarthritis using the SF-12 score. Methods: We carried out a prospective, comparative study carried out over a period of 15 months, (September 2016-December 2017), in 120 patients recruited from the outpatient department of the Physical Medicine and Functional Rehabilitation Department of HMPIT in whom the diagnosis of knee osteoarthri-tis was made according to the criteria of the ACR. The patients were randomly divided into 2 groups of 60 patients each. The frst group called G1 received a classic rehabilitation program. The second group called G2 benefted from aquatic gymnastics. The study was based on the SF-12 quality of life assessment. Two evaluations were made, the frst (T1) before the start of rehabilitation and the second (T2) at the end of the eight weeks of care. Results: The mean age of our patients was 57.2 ± 12.5 years in G1 vs 54.3 ± 7. 1 years in G2 (p = 0.012). The sex ratio was 0.2 in G1 versus 0.37 in G2 (p = 0.011). The duration of knee osteoarthritis was 63.4 ± 4.5 months in G1 vs 56.2±7.5 months in G2 (p=0.172). Initially, the mean of SF12-P in G1 patients was 31.2 ± 6.5 compared to 35.4±6.2 in G2 patients. In our patients, the SF12-P score was less than 50 in 100% of cases in G1 and in 98% of cases in G2. There was a statistically signifcant difference between the 2 groups (p = 0.04). After classical rehabilitation, the SF12-P had increased on average by 2.3 against 6.1 after aquatic gymnastics with a statistically signif-cant difference between the 2 groups (p = 0.012). Initially, the mean of SF12-M in G1 patients was 32.5 ± 10.2 and 35.3 ± 8.9 in G2 patients. In our patients, the SF12-M score was less than 50 in 94% of cases in G1 and in 98% of cases in G2. There was no statistically signifcant difference between the 2 groups (p = 0.652). After classical rehabilitation, the SF12-M increased on average by 6.9 and 12.1 after aquatic gymnastics with a statistically signifcant difference between the 2 groups (p = 0.005). Conclusion: The effectiveness of functional rehabilitation, whether aquatic or dry, has been well demonstrated by the study of quality of life, with better results for balneotherapy. The physical properties of water and heat have a positive short-term impact on quality of life by acting on several parameters, including pain, contractures and anxiety. Further studies evaluating this long-term effectiveness will be required.