ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07696650CTM-RRUpdated Aug 24, 2026

Evaluation of Choose to Move Replacement Ready (CTM-RR)

An interventional study of Choose to Move Replacement Ready in Osteoarthritis (OA), Osteoarthritis (OA) of the Hip and Osteoarthritis (OA) of the Knee, sponsored by University of British Columbia. Recruiting at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 50 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-24.

Sponsored by University of British Columbia · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
210
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
50 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Choose to Move (CTM) is a 3-month, choice-based health-promoting program for low active older adults being scaled-up across British Columbia (BC), Canada. Recently, the investigators adapted CTM for the >14000 people in BC who are on surgical waitlists for total knee replacement or total hip replacement (TKR/THR) for osteoarthritis (OA). The primary goals of this observational study are to describe how the adapted program, Choose to Move Replacement Ready (CTM-RR), is implemented in BC and determine if the adapted program improves health outcomes in people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who are on surgical waitlists for TKR/THR. The investigators will also evaluate whether any health benefits achieved by CTM-RR participants are maintained three months after they finish the program and also during the remaining time that they wait for their TKR/THR surgery.

The investigators will work with referral partners from hospitals and orthopaedic clinics in BC to recruit participants into CTM-RR. Participants who enrol in CTM-RR will answer online survey questions about the program and about their physical activity, mobility, pain, function, quality of life, willingness to undergo surgery, overall perception of their joint condition, psychosocial health, self-efficacy, social isolation, loneliness, and sedentary time. CTM-RR activity coaches will also answer online survey questions about the program. CTM-RR participants, activity coaches, and referral partners will also participate in interviews about the program.

Read the detailed description

Choose to Move (CTM) an effective 3-month, choice-based health-promoting program for low active older adults being scaled-up in phases across British Columbia (BC), Canada. Choose to Move Replacement Ready (CTM-RR) is an adapted version of the program tailored to support individuals with hip and/ or knee osteoarthritis on surgical waitlists for TKR/THR, with the overall goal of enhancing key health outcomes. Referral partners from hospitals and orthopaedic clinics in BC will inform patients about CTM-RR when they are booked for a hip or knee replacement surgery. Trained activity coaches hired by the Active Aging Society will deliver the online CTM-RR program to individuals on surgical waitlists for TKR/THR who register for the program. The investigators will then evaluate implementation of CTM-RR, impact of CTM-RR on participants' physical and social health, and maintenance of any health benefits.

The primary aim of this trial is to assess implementation and effectiveness of the adapted CTM-RR program. The specific objectives are to:

  1. assess implementation of CTM-RR. Specifically, implementation determinants (context, acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, self-efficacy) and implementation outcomes (1° implementation outcome: fidelity; 2° implementation outcomes: reach, retention, adoption, dose, adaptation, satisfaction).
  2. evaluate effectiveness of CTM-RR. Specifically, whether CTM-RR increases participants' pre-operative moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (moderate to vigorous physical activity, 1° effectiveness outcome), mobility, psychosocial health, self-efficacy to manage their condition; improves their pain, function, quality of life, and perception of their joint condition, and decreases social isolation and loneliness (2° effectiveness outcomes).
  3. evaluate if participant health benefits (if any) are maintained 3 months after CTM-RR is completed.
  4. evaluate if participant health benefits (if any) are maintained up until participant's surgery (i.e. during the remaining surgical waiting period).

In partnership with the Active Aging Society, the investigators aim to deliver 20 CTM-RR online programs over two years to approximately 300 participants across BC. There is no cost to participate in the CTM-RR program, and individuals may participate in CTM-RR regardless of whether they choose to be evaluated as part of this trial. The investigators expect approximately 70% of CTM-RR participants to volunteer for the evaluation.

The investigators will conduct a pre-post, observational cohort trial using a hybrid implementation effectiveness type 2 trial design. Data will be collected at 0 (baseline), 3 (postintervention), and 6 (long-term follow-up) months and 2-weeks before surgery (pre-operative) to assess implementation and impact of CTM-RR, and maintenance of any program-related benefits.

02

Conditions studied

  • Osteoarthritis (OA)
  • Osteoarthritis (OA) of the Hip
  • Osteoarthritis (OA) of the Knee
  • Total Knee Anthroplasty
  • Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA)
  • Mobility Limitation
  • Physical Activity
  • Older Adults
  • Social Isolation or Loneliness
  • Pain
  • Implementation Science
  • Sedentary Behaviors

Keywords

  • Osteoarthritis
  • Implementation science
  • Physical activity
  • Social isolation
  • Older adults
  • Mobility
  • Joint replacement
  • Loneliness
  • Pain
03

In context

Osteoarthritis

2,974 studies on the registry are indexed under Osteoarthritis; 438 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 210 is above the median of 80 across 2,240 interventional studies indexed under Osteoarthritis.

Browse Osteoarthritis studies →

Lead sponsor

University of British Columbia is the lead sponsor of 1,339 studies on the registry; 259 are open to participants now.

Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 1 (17%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
50 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Activity coach hired by the Active Aging Society (activity coaches must speak English to participate in the evaluation);
  2. English-speaking older adults (aged >=50 years) who participate in CTM-RR will be invited to participate in the evaluation;
  3. Referral partner (People who work in a healthcare setting who refer patients into the program)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. non-English speaking activity coach
  2. non-English speaking referral partner
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
210 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Choose to Move Replacement Ready

    Choose to Move Replacement Ready CTM-RR is a 3-month program for individuals with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis on surgical waitlists for total hip or total knee replacement that includes three required components: 1) a 30-min one-on-one virtual consultation (via Zoom) where activity coaches support participants to set goals and develop a physical activity (PA) action plan; 2) 8 virtual group meetings (via Zoom, 90-min each) facilitated by activity coaches, with participants (10/program) who provide peer support. Each meeting includes: i) two, 15-min movement breaks where participants perform structured hip and knee exercises delivered by the coach and ii) education and discussion on relevant topics (e.g. goal setting, PA, what to expect from surgery); 3) Home-based hip and knee exercises to complete independently, 2x/week. Optional components of CTM-RR include 4) a bi-weekly newsletter distributed by the Active Aging Society and 5) peer support check-ins outside of group meetings.

    Behavioral: Choose to Move Replacement Ready

Interventions

  • BehavioralChoose to Move Replacement Ready

    As described under study arm description.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Implementation outcome: Fidelity (Proportion of participants who adhered to CTM-RR program components)

    Obtained from post-program survey. Measures adherence to prescribed frequency, intensity, duration, and type of exercises performed, and attendance at CTM-RR group meetings.

    Time frame: 3 months

  2. Effectiveness outcome: Change in physical activity

    Single-item physical activity questionnaire. Output measure is self-reported number of days engaging in ≥30 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in the past week (range 0-7). Higher scores reflect a better outcome (i.e. increased physical activity)

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

Secondary outcomes

  1. Reach

    Number of individuals participating in CTM-RR programs will be obtained from program records

    Time frame: 3 months

  2. Retention

    Obtained from evaluation records. Proportion of participants who consent to the evaluation who complete each assessment.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  3. Dose delivered

    Obtained from post-program survey. Proportion of required intervention components (group meetings and one-on-one consultations) delivered by activity coaches.

    Time frame: 3 months

  4. Adoption

    Obtained from program records. Number of referral partners who refer participants to the program.

    Time frame: 3 months

  5. Adaptation (survey)

    Planned or purposeful changes to the delivery of CTM-RR by activity coaches will be assessed by survey (short answer responses; developed in house). Coaches will indicate if they made any adaptations to the program (yes/no) and to provide details of any adaptations such as why it needed to occur.

    Time frame: 3 months

  6. Satisfaction with CTM-RR (survey)

    Satisfaction with CTM-RR will be assessed via participant (older adults) survey (designed in house). Higher scores (1-5 Likert scale) indicate higher participant satisfaction with the intervention.

    Time frame: 3 months

  7. Change in walking time

    International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-SF): assesses self-reported weekly minutes of walking

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  8. Change in sedentary time

    International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-SF): assesses self-reported weekly minutes of sedentary time

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  9. Change in bone and muscle strengthening activity

    Single-item muscle strengthening activity survey. Number of days in past week doing activities that increase bone and muscle strength

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  10. Change in balance activity

    Single-item activity survey. Number of days in past week doing activities that improve balance.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  11. Change in capacity for mobility

    Short-Form-36 health survey (SF-36) Physical Functioning Scale: two items assess self-reported ability to walk ¼ mile and 1 flight of stairs.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  12. Change in social isolation

    Social Isolation Questionnaire: score (0-15) reflects the degree of social interaction and support. Higher scores indicate a greater level of social interaction and support.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  13. Change in loneliness

    The 3-item U.S. Health and Retirement Study Participant Lifestyle Questionnaire reflects experiences of loneliness. Each item is scored on a scale of 1-3. The output variable is the summed score of the 3 items (range 3-9); Higher scores indicate greater perceived loneliness.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  14. Change in ability to participate in daily activities

    The four-item PROMIS- Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Scale- short form 4a will be used to assess perceived ability to perform one's usual social roles and activities. Each item is scored on a scale of 1-5. The output variable is the summed raw score of all 4-items (range 4-20) converted into a T-score (27.5-64.2) ; higher scores indicate greater ability to engage in social roles and activities.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  15. Change in Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome 12-item Score

    The 12-item Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS-12) assesses patients' hip condition (pain, function, quality of life). Each item is scored on a scale of 0-10. The output variable is the average score of the 12-items (range 0-100); higher scores indicate worse hip problems.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  16. Change in Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome 12-item Score

    The 12-item Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS-12) assesses patients' knee condition (pain, function, quality of life). Each item is scored on a scale of 0-10. The output variable is the average score of the 12- items (range 0-100); higher scores indicate worse knee problems.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  17. Change in patient global assessment of target joint

    Single-item measure using a numerical rating scale: score (0-10) assesses the overall condition of the affected hip or knee joint. Higher scores indicate worse condition (severe symptoms).

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  18. Change in arthritis-specific self-efficacy

    The 8-item questionnaire assesses how certain an individual is that they can manage various aspects of their arthritis. Each item is scored on a scale of 1-10. The output variable is the average score of all 8-items (range 8-80); higher scores indicate more self-efficacy.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  19. Change in pain intensity

    Pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS): score (0-10) assesses pain intensity on average during the past week. Higher scores indicate worse pain intensity.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  20. Change in willingness to undergo surgery

    One item will assess participants' willingness to undergo hip or knee replacement surgery. The question asks: "What is your current willingness to undergo a \[total hip replacement surgery or total knee replacement surgery\]?" The response options are: definitely unwilling, probably unwilling, unsure, probably willing or definitely willing. Definitely unwilling, probably unwilling, unsure= No, and probably willing or definitely willing=Yes. The output variable is self-reported willingness to undergo surgery (yes/no).

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  21. Change in anxiety

    The Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7) will be used to assess the presence of anxiety. Each item is scored on a scale of 0-3. The output variable is the summed total of all scores (range 0-21); higher scores indicate greater levels of anxiety.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  22. Change in kinesiophobia

    The 11-item Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11) assesses fear of movement in individuals with chronic pain. Each item is scored on a scale of 1-4. The output variable is the total summed score of all 11-items (range 11-44); higher scores indicate greater fear of movement.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

  23. Change in exercise self-efficacy

    The 10-item Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (ESES) assesses how confident participants are with regard to carrying out regular physical activities and exercise. Each item is scored on a scale of 1-4. The output variable is the total summed score of all 10 items (range 10-40); higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy for exercise.

    Time frame: baseline, 3 and 6 months, 2 weeks pre-operative

Other outcomes

  1. Perceived participant responsiveness (survey)

    Perceived participant responsiveness will be assessed via participant (older adults) survey ( short answer responses; developed in house). Older adults will indicate which optional intervention components they engaged in (peer check-in, e-mail newsletter, hip and knee exercises; yes/no response options)

    Time frame: 3 months

  2. Acceptability - CTM-RR program

    Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM). Activity coaches' perception that CTM-RR is agreeable or satisfactory will be assessed by survey (4 items each on a 1-5 Likert scale with 1 being completely disagree and 5 being completely agree).

    Time frame: 3 months

  3. Appropriateness - CTM-RR program

    Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM). Extent to which CTM-RR fits the needs of the target population will be assessed by survey (4 items each on a 1-5 Likert scale with 1 being completely disagree and 5 being completely agree)

    Time frame: 3 months

  4. Feasibility - CTM-RR program

    Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). Activity coaches' perception that CTM-RR is feasible to deliver will be assessed by survey (4 items each on a 1-5 Likert scale with 1 being completely disagree and 5 being completely agree).

    Time frame: 3 months

  5. Adaptation (interview)

    Planned or purposeful changes to the delivery of CTM-RR by activity coaches will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 months

  6. Experience with training and program delivery (interview)

    Activity coaches overall experience with program training and delivery, will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 months

  7. Perceived participant responsiveness (interview)

    Activity coaches' perceptions of participant responsiveness will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 months

  8. Adaptations (interview)

    Older adults' perceptions of potential adaptations to improve the program will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 and 6 months

  9. Perceived participant responsiveness (interview)

    Older adults' responsiveness during the program will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 and 6 months

  10. Acceptability- CTM-RR program (interview)

    Older adults' perceptions that the program is acceptable or satisfactory will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 and 6 months

  11. Feasibility- CTM-RR program (interview)

    Older adults' perceptions of the program's feasibility will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 and 6 months

  12. Appropriateness- CTM-RR program (interview)

    Older adults' perceptions of the program's appropriateness will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 and 6 months

  13. Feasibility - CTM-RR referral process (interview)

    Referral partners' perception that the CTM-RR referral process can be used successfully within the organization will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 months

  14. Acceptability - CTM-RR referral process (interview)

    Referral partners' perception that the CTM-RR referral process is acceptable or satisfactory will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 months

  15. Appropriateness - CTM-RR referral process (interview)

    Referral partners' perception regarding the extent to which the CTM-RR referral process fits with the mission, priorities, and values of the organization will be assessed by interview (no score associated with qualitative interview).

    Time frame: 3 months

  16. Sociodemographics

    22-item survey (developed in house) to capture sociodemographic characteristics of older adults including: postal code, city, age, gender, sex, height, weight, ethnicity, education level, employment status, chronic diseases, disability, living arrangement, marital status, affected joint (surgical hip or knee), other affected joints (hip/knee/spine/hands/feet), date of surgery (if known), time on waitlist, name of operating surgeon/hospital, years with hip/knee symptoms most days of the week, prior total hip/knee replacement, medication use, use of muscle strengthening exercises for their joint pain or general aerobic fitness exercise for their joint pain in the last three months, and referral source.

    Time frame: Baseline

  17. Surgery date

    Determined from monthly survey sent to older adults if surgery date is not known when they complete the CTM-RR program.

    Time frame: Monthly following program completion until surgery date is known (assessed up to two years).

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Nettlefold L, Macdonald HM, Sims Gould J, Bauman A, Szewczyk Z, McKay HA. Does optimizing Choose to Move - a health-promoting program for older adults - enhance scalability, program implementation and effectiveness? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2024 Dec 18;21(1):140. doi: 10.1186/s12966-024-01649-9. PubMed 39695643 ↗
  • Curran GM, Bauer M, Mittman B, Pyne JM, Stetler C. Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Med Care. 2012 Mar;50(3):217-26. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182408812. PubMed 22310560 ↗
  • Milton K, Bull FC, Bauman A. Reliability and validity testing of a single-item physical activity measure. Br J Sports Med. 2011 Mar;45(3):203-8. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.068395. Epub 2010 May 19. PubMed 20484314 ↗
  • Hughes ME, Waite LJ, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT. A Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in Large Surveys: Results From Two Population-Based Studies. Res Aging. 2004;26(6):655-672. doi: 10.1177/0164027504268574. PubMed 18504506 ↗
  • Macdonald HM, Nettlefold L, Bauman A, Sims-Gould J, McKay HA. Pragmatic Evaluation of Older Adults' Physical Activity in Scale-Up Studies: Is the Single-Item Measure a Reasonable Option? J Aging Phys Act. 2022 Feb 1;30(1):25-32. doi: 10.1123/japa.2020-0412. Epub 2021 Aug 4. PubMed 34348228 ↗
  • Simonsick EM, Newman AB, Visser M, Goodpaster B, Kritchevsky SB, Rubin S, Nevitt MC, Harris TB; Health, Aging and Body Composition Study. Mobility limitation in self-described well-functioning older adults: importance of endurance walk testing. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008 Aug;63(8):841-7. doi: 10.1093/gerona/63.8.841. PubMed 18772472 ↗
  • Bauer GR, Braimoh J, Scheim AI, Dharma C. Transgender-inclusive measures of sex/gender for population surveys: Mixed-methods evaluation and recommendations. PLoS One. 2017 May 25;12(5):e0178043. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178043. eCollection 2017. PubMed 28542498 ↗
  • Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, Hovmand P, Aarons G, Bunger A, Griffey R, Hensley M. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011 Mar;38(2):65-76. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7. PubMed 20957426 ↗
  • McKay H, Naylor PJ, Lau E, Gray SM, Wolfenden L, Milat A, Bauman A, Race D, Nettlefold L, Sims-Gould J. Implementation and scale-up of physical activity and behavioural nutrition interventions: an evaluation roadmap. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019 Nov 7;16(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s12966-019-0868-4. PubMed 31699095 ↗
  • Durlak JA, DuPre EP. Implementation matters: a review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. Am J Community Psychol. 2008 Jun;41(3-4):327-50. doi: 10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0. PubMed 18322790 ↗
  • Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, Oja P. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Aug;35(8):1381-95. doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB. PubMed 12900694 ↗
  • Bjelland I, Dahl AA, Haug TT, Neckelmann D. The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. An updated literature review. J Psychosom Res. 2002 Feb;52(2):69-77. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3999(01)00296-3. PubMed 11832252 ↗
  • Klassbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 2003;32(1):46-51. doi: 10.1080/03009740310000409. PubMed 12635946 ↗
  • Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998 Aug;28(2):88-96. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1998.28.2.88. PubMed 9699158 ↗
  • Jensen MP, Karoly P, Braver S. The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain. 1986 Oct;27(1):117-126. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9. PubMed 3785962 ↗
  • Kroll T, Kehn M, Ho PS, Groah S. The SCI Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (ESES): development and psychometric properties. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2007 Aug 30;4:34. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-4-34. PubMed 17760999 ↗
  • Alghadir AH, Anwer S, Iqbal A, Iqbal ZA. Test-retest reliability, validity, and minimum detectable change of visual analog, numerical rating, and verbal rating scales for measurement of osteoarthritic knee pain. J Pain Res. 2018 Apr 26;11:851-856. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S158847. eCollection 2018. PubMed 29731662 ↗
  • Hawker GA, Bohm E, Dunbar MJ, Faris P, Jones CA, Noseworthy T, Ravi B, Woodhouse LJ, Marshall DA; BEST-Knee Study Team. Patient appropriateness for total knee arthroplasty and predicted probability of a good outcome. RMD Open. 2023 Apr;9(2):e002808. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2022-002808. PubMed 37068914 ↗
  • Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, Boynton MH, Halko H. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017 Aug 29;12(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3. PubMed 28851459 ↗
  • Nilsdotter AK, Lohmander LS, Klassbo M, Roos EM. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)--validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003 May 30;4:10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-4-10. Epub 2003 May 30. PubMed 12777182 ↗
  • Peer MA, Lane J. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): a review of its psychometric properties in people undergoing total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2013 Jan;43(1):20-8. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2013.4057. Epub 2012 Dec 7. PubMed 23221356 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 24, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07696650
Collaborators
Active Aging Society, Specialist Services Committee (Doctors of BC)
Responsible party
Heather McKay (Professor, University of British Columbia) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jul 10, 2026
Start date
Sep 1, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Aug 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Aug 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 24, 2026

Study contacts

Douglas L Race, MSc
Contact
douglas.race@ubc.ca
604-875-4111 ext. 21787
Giulia Coletta, PhD
Contact
giulia.coletta@ubc.ca
604-875-4111
Heather A McKay, PhD
principal investigator · University of British Columbia
Laura Churchill, PT, PhD
principal investigator · University of British Columbia
Joanie Sims Gould, MSW, PhD
principal investigator · University of British Columbia

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion