Self-reported quality care for knee osteoarthritis: comparisons across Denmark, Norway, Portugal and the UK

Implementing an osteoarthritis management program to deliver guideline-driven care for knee and hip osteoarthritis in a U.S. academic health system

Objective

Assess implementation feasibility and outcomes for an Osteoarthritis Management Program (OAMP) at an academic center.

Design

This open study assessed an OAMP designed to deliver care in 1-5 individual or group visits across ≤12 months. Eligibility included adults with knee or hip osteoarthritis with ≥1 visit from 7/1/2017-1/15/2021. A multidisciplinary care team provided: education on osteoarthritis, self-management, exercise, weight loss; pharmacologic management; assessments of mood, sleep, quality of life, and diet. Clinic utilization and growth are reported through 2022. Patient outcomes of body mass index (BMI), pain, and function were analyzed using multivariable general linear models. OAMP outcomes were feasibility and sustainability.

Results

Most patients were locally referred by primary care. 953 patients attended 2531 visits (average visits 2.16, treatment duration 187.9 days). Most were female (72.6%), older (62.1), white (91.1%), and had medical insurance (95.4%). Obesity was prevalent (84.7% BMI ≥30, average BMI 40.9), mean Charlson Comorbidity Index was 1.89, and functional testing was below average. Longitudinal modeling revealed statistically but not clinically significant pain reduction (4.4-3.9 on 0-10 scale, p ​= ​0.002). BMI did not significantly change (p ​= ​0.87). Higher baseline pain and BMI correlated with greater reductions in each posttreatment. Uninsured patients had shorter treatment duration. Increasing clinic hours (4-24 ​h weekly) and serving 953 patients over four years demonstrated OAMP sustainability.

Conclusions

OAMP implementation was feasible and sustainable. Patients with high baseline pain and BMI were more likely to improve. Noninsurance was a barrier. These results contribute to understanding OAMP outcomes in U.S. healthcare.

'I do hope more people can benefit from it.': The qualitative experience of individuals living with osteoarthritis who participated in the GLA:D™ program in Alberta, Canada

INTRODUCTION

The Good Life with osteoArthritis: Denmark (GLA:DTM) is an evidence-based program designed for individuals with symptomatic hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). This program has reported improvement in pain, quality of life and self-efficacy, as well as delays in joint replacement surgery for adults with moderate to severe hip or knee OA. Evaluations of GLA:DTM implementation in several countries have focused on effectiveness, training, and feasibility of the program primarily from the provider perspective. Our objective was to examine how the GLA:DTM program was perceived and experienced by individuals with hip and knee OA to inform on-going program refinement and implementation.

METHODS

Thirty semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with participants who completed the GLA:DTM program in Alberta. An interpretive description approach was used to frame the study and thematic analysis was used to code the data and identify emergent themes and sub-themes associated with participants' experience and perception of the GLA:DTM program.

RESULTS

Most participants had a positive experience of the GLA:DTM program and particularly enjoyed the group format, although some participants felt the group format prevented one-on-one support from providers. Three emergent themes related to acceptability were identified: accessible, adaptable, and supportive. Participants found the program to be accessible in terms of location, cost, and scheduling. They also felt the program was adaptable and allowed for individual attention and translatability into other settings. Finally, most participants found the group format to be motivating and fostered connections between participants.

CONCLUSION

The GLA:DTM program was perceived as acceptable by most participants, yet the group format may not be useful for all individuals living with OA. Recommended improvements included adapting screening to identify those suited for the group format, providing program access earlier in the disease progression trajectory, modifying educational content based on participants' knowledge of OA and finally, providing refresher sessions after program completion.

The effect of geographic location and payor type on provincial-wide delivery of the GLA:D program for hip and knee osteoarthritis in Alberta, Canada

Objective

The Good Life with osteoArthritis: Denmark (GLA:D™) program for knee and hip osteoarthritis has been shown to be effective, but evaluations have yet to explore whether effectiveness differs by program context. The present study explores whether there are differences in effectiveness of the GLA:D™ program for treatment of hip and knee osteoarthritis across program location (i.e., rural, urban, metro) and program payor (i.e., public, private) within Alberta, Canada.

Design

The study population was adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis attending the 8-week GLA:D™ supervised exercise and education programme in Alberta between Sep 2017-Mar 2020. Outcomes of interest were joint-related pain and quality of life (HOOS/KOOS), health quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), and performance-based functional (30-s chair stand test; 40-m walk test) measures. Minimally clinically important changes were calculated for each outcome and ANOVA and chi-square tests were used to determine statistical significance by program location or payor.

Results

Of the 1321 eligible participants, 974 (73.7%) completed the baseline questionnaire, about 50% of participants participated in a metro area and 60% paid privately for the program. There were no statistically significant differences in improvements of joint-related pain, joint-related quality of life, health-related quality of life, or performance-based functional measures by program location or program payor, except for participants who received the program in a publicly covered primary care clinic who experienced significantly larger improvements in joint-related pain.

Conclusion

The implementation of the GLA:D™ program for the treatment of knee and hip osteoarthritis in Alberta is effective across a range of contexts.

Multi-level strategies to improve equitable timely person-centred osteoarthritis care for diverse women: qualitative interviews with women and healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Women are more likely to develop osteoarthritis (OA), and have greater OA pain and disability compared with men, but are less likely to receive guideline-recommended management, particularly racialized women. OA care of diverse women, and strategies to improve the quality of their OA care is understudied. The purpose of this study was to explore strategies to overcome barriers of access to OA care for diverse women.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews with key informants and used content analysis to identify themes regarding what constitutes person-centred OA care, barriers of OA care, and strategies to support equitable timely access to person-centred OA care.

RESULTS

We interviewed 27 women who varied by ethno-cultural group (e.g. African or Caribbean Black, Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Pakistani, Caucasian), age, region of Canada, level of education, location of OA and years with OA; and 31 healthcare professionals who varied by profession (e.g. family physician, nurse practitioner, community pharmacist, physio- and occupational therapists, chiropractors, healthcare executives, policy-makers), career stage, region of Canada and type of organization. Participants within and across groups largely agreed on approaches for person-centred OA care across six domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address emotions, manage uncertainty, share decisions and enable self-management. Participants identified 22 barriers of access and 18 strategies to overcome barriers at the patient- (e.g. educational sessions and materials that accommodate cultural norms offered in different languages and formats for persons affected by OA), healthcare professional- (e.g. medical and continuing education on OA and on providing OA care tailored to intersectional factors) and system- (e.g. public health campaigns to raise awareness of OA, and how to prevent and manage it; self-referral to and public funding for therapy, greater number and ethno-cultural diversity of healthcare professionals, healthcare policies that address the needs of diverse women, dedicated inter-professional OA clinics, and a national strategy to coordinate OA care) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This research contributes to a gap in knowledge of how to optimize OA care for disadvantaged groups including diverse women. Ongoing efforts are needed to examine how best to implement these strategies, which will require multi-sector collaboration and must engage diverse women.

The feasibility, facilitators, and barriers in the initial implementation phase of 'good life with osteoarthritis in Denmark' (GLA:D®) in Switzerland: a cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

The guideline-based, conservative, non-pharmacological management of hip and knee osteoarthritis in clinical practice has been insufficient in Switzerland until now. The implementation of "Good Life with Osteoarthritis in Denmark" (GLA:D®), a programme designed to address this evidence-performance gap, was started in 2019 in Switzerland. This study investigated the acceptance and practicality of the GLA:D® Switzerland programme and identified the facilitators and barriers to its implementation, to support the development of tailored implementation strategies.

METHODS

This is a non-experimental observational study. A cross-sectional survey was performed among the physiotherapists (PTs) of the first five GLA:D® Switzerland certification courses, using the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) to identify the facilitators and barriers. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and qualitative content analysis was used for open-ended questions.

RESULTS

In the online survey, 86 GLA:D® certified PTs participated (response rate: 61%). The majority of 51 PTs (63.7%) worked in private practices. Of the responding PTs 58 (78.4%) were satisfied with the general concept of the GLA:D® Switzerland programme. Practicality was evaluated positively, particularly the second and third individual session (n = 40 PTs, 83.3%), the 40 m Fast-paced Walk Test (43, 89.6%), the 30 s Chair Stand Test (45, 93.8%), and the exercise programme (40, 83.3%). The marketing (12, 15%), the 'data entry' (5, 10.4%), 'register the patient' (7, 14.6%), and the digital patient questionnaire (9, 14.2%) were rated less positively. In total, 12 facilitators and 12 barriers were identified. The barriers were mainly related to adopting user, e.g., perceived personal disadvantages. Barriers were also found in the organisational context, e.g., time available. Facilitators were associated with the GLA:D® Switzerland programme itself, e.g., completeness, relevance for patients, and the adopting user, e.g., self-efficacy, and in the organisational context, e.g., material resources and facilities. Topics related to the socio-political context were raised in the answers to the open-ended questions, e.g., general awareness level of the GLA:D® Switzerland programme and patient recruitment.

CONCLUSION

The acceptance, practicality and facilitators identified from the initial implementation are encouraging. However, the identified barriers and activities rated with low practicality require tailored strategies to support a successful implementation of the GLA:D® Switzerland programme.

Evaluating Osteoarthritis Management Programs: outcome domain recommendations from the OARSI Joint Effort Initiative

OBJECTIVE

To develop sets of core and optional recommended domains for describing and evaluating Osteoarthritis Management Programs (OAMPs), with a focus on hip and knee Osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

We conducted a 3-round modified Delphi survey involving an international group of researchers, health professionals, health administrators and people with OA. In Round 1, participants ranked the importance of 75 outcome and descriptive domains in five categories: patient impacts, implementation outcomes, and characteristics of the OAMP and its participants and clinicians. Domains ranked as "important" or "essential" by ≥80% of participants were retained, and participants could suggest additional domains. In Round 2, participants rated their level of agreement that each domain was essential for evaluating OAMPs: 0 = strongly disagree to 10 = strongly agree. A domain was retained if ≥80% rated it ≥6. In Round 3, participants rated remaining domains using same scale as in Round 2; a domain was recommended as "core" if ≥80% of participants rated it ≥9 and as "optional" if ≥80% rated it ≥7.

RESULTS

A total of 178 individuals from 26 countries participated; 85 completed all survey rounds. Only one domain, "ability to participate in daily activities", met criteria for a core domain; 25 domains met criteria for an optional recommendation: 8 Patient Impacts, 5 Implementation Outcomes, 5 Participant Characteristics, 3 OAMP Characteristics and 4 Clinician Characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The ability of patients with OA to participate in daily activities should be evaluated in all OAMPs. Teams evaluating OAMPs should consider including domains from the optional recommended set, with representation from all five categories and based on stakeholder priorities in their local context.

Patient-Reported Quality of Care for Osteoarthritis in General Practice in South Tyrol, Italy: Protocol for Translation, Validation and Assessment of the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator Questionnaire (OA-QI)

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of knee and hip osteoarthritis are similar internationally. Nevertheless, clinical practice varies across countries. Instruments for measuring quality have been developed to improve health care through targeted interventions. Studies on health service quality must consider the structural and cultural characteristics of countries, because each of their strengths and weaknesses differ. However, such instruments for health-related patient-reported outcomes for osteoarthritis have not yet been validated in German and Italian languages.

OBJECTIVES

In order to be able to set targeted measures for the improvement of prevention and non-surgical treatment of osteoarthritis in South Tyrol, Italy, the quality of care must be recorded. Therefore, the aim of the project is to update, translate, and validate the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator (OA-QI) questionnaire version 2, an established and validated questionnaire in Norwegian and English, for Germany and Italy. The second aim is to determine the quality of care for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee in a sample of patients who consult general practice in South Tyrol, and for comparison with patients who are admitted to rehabilitative spa-treatments for osteoarthritis in the state of Salzburg, Austria.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will enable the identification and closure of gaps in osteoarthritis care. Although it is expected that body weight and exercise will play special roles, other areas of nonsurgical care might also be involved.

Quality of knee osteoarthritis care in the Netherlands: a survey on the perspective of people with osteoarthritis

Background

Quality indicators (QIs) are used to monitor quality of care and adherence to osteoarthritis (OA) standards of care. Patient reported QIs can identify the most important gaps in quality of care and the most vulnerable patient groups. The aim of this study was to capture the perspective of people with knee OA (KOA) in the Netherlands on the quality of care received, and explore determinants related to lower achievement rates.

Methods

We sent an online survey to all members of The Dutch Knee Panel (n = 622) of the Sint Maartenskliniek Nijmegen, the Netherlands between September and October 2019. The survey consisted of a slightly adapted version of the “OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator” (OA-QI) questionnaire (18 items; yes, no, N/A); a rating of quality of KOA care on a 10-point scale; a question on whether or not one wanted to see change in the care for KOA; and an open-ended question asking recommendations for improvement of OA care. Furthermore, sociodemographic and disease related characteristics were collected. Pass rates for separate QIs and pass rates on patient level were calculated by dividing the number of times the indicator was achieved by the number of eligible persons for that particular indicator.

Results

A total of 434 participants (70%) completed the survey. The mean (SD) pass rate (those answering “Yes”) for separate QIs was 49% (20%); ranging from 15% for receiving referral for weight reduction to 75% for patient education on how to manage knee OA. The mean (SD) pass rate on patient level was 52% (23%). Presence of OA in other joints, comorbidities, and having a knee replacement were associated with higher pass rates. On average, a score of 6.5 (1.6) was given for the quality of care received, and the majority of respondents (59%) wanted change in the care for KOA. Of 231 recommendations made, most often mentioned were the need for tailoring of care (14%), more education (13%), and more empathy and support from healthcare providers (12%).

Conclusion

This study found patients are only moderately satisfied with the OA care received, and showed substantial gaps between perceived quality of care for OA and internationally accepted standards. Future research should focus on the underlying reasons and provide strategies to bridge these gaps.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08014-1.

Similar Effects of Exercise Therapy, Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs, and Opioids for Knee Osteoarthritis Pain: A Systematic Review with Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and exercise therapy for knee osteoarthritis pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review with network meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SEARCH

We searched the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to April 15, 2021. Web of Science was used for citation tracking.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing exercise therapy, NSAIDs, and opioids in any combination for knee osteoarthritis pain.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Network meta-analysis comparing exercise therapy, NSAIDs, opioids, and placebo/control for knee osteoarthritis pain. Additional trials from previous reviews were included to create the external placebo/control anchor.

RESULTS

We included 13 trials (1398 patients) with direct comparisons, supplemented with data from 101 additional trials. The treatment effect of NSAIDs for knee osteoarthritis pain was similar to that of opioids (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.14 to 0.18; Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations [GRADE]: low certainty). Exercise therapy had a larger effect than NSAIDs (SMD, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.89; GRADE: very low certainty). No estimate could be made for exercise vs opioids due to the lack of studies. Exercise therapy ranked as the "best" intervention in the network meta-analysis, followed by NSAIDs, opioids, and placebo/control intervention (GRADE: low certainty).

CONCLUSION

Exercise therapy ranked as the best treatment for knee osteoarthritis pain, followed by NSAIDs and opioids. The difference between treatments was small and likely not clinically relevant, and the overall confidence in the ranking was low. The results highlight the limited evidence for comparative effectiveness between exercise therapy, NSAIDs, and opioids for knee osteoarthritis pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(4):207-216. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10490.

Changes in received quality of care for knee osteoarthritis after a multicomponent intervention in a general practice in Denmark

OBJECTIVE

First-line treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis should ideally prescribe patient education, exercise, and if needed, weight loss. In practice, however, adjunctive treatments, including painkillers and referrals to specialists, are typically introduced before these measures. This study evaluated interventions to sustainably improve general practitioner delivered care for patients with knee osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

Comparison of impacts of knee osteoarthritis care during four half-year periods: before, 6, 12, and 18 months after primary intervention based on electronic medical records (EMR) and patient questionnaires.

SETTING

Danish general practitioners (GPs) treating 6240 patients.

PARTICIPANTS

Four GPs, two GP trainees, and six staff members.

INTERVENTIONS

Six pre-planned primary interventions: patient leaflet, GP and staff educational session, knee osteoarthritis consultation, two functional tests monitoring patient function, EMR phrase aiding consultation, and waiting room advertisement and three supportive follow-up interventions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Usage of first-line and adjunctive treatment elements, the functional tests, and the EMR phrase.

RESULTS

Approximately 50 knee osteoarthritis cases participated in each of the four half-year periods. Primary interventions had only transient effects lasting <12 months on the knee osteoarthritis care. Functional tests and EMR phrases were used predominantly during the first 6 months, where a transient drop in the referral rate to orthopedics was observed. Use of educational elements was moderate and without significant change during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

More routine use of the primary or inclusion of novel increased-adherence interventions is needed to sustainably improve care for knee osteoarthritis patients in Danish general practice.

Quality of Care Indicators for Hospital Physical Therapy Units: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was to identify quality indicators described in the literature that may be used as quality measures in hospital physical therapy units.

METHODS

The following sources were searched for quality indicators or articles: Web of Science, MEDLINE, IBECS, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Academic Search Complete, SportDiscus, SciELO, PsychINFO, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, and Scopus databases; the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, National Health System Indicator Portal, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development websites; and the National Quality Forum's measures inventory tool. Search terms included "quality indicator," "quality measure," "physiotherapy," and "physical therapy." Inclusion criteria were articles written in English, Spanish, French, or Portuguese aimed at measuring the quality of care in hospital physical therapy units. Evidence-based indicators with an explicit formula were extracted by 2 independent reviewers and then classified using the structure-process-outcome model, quality domain, and categories defined by a consensus method.

RESULTS

Of the 176 articles identified, only 19 met the criteria. From these articles and from the indicator repository searches, 178 clinical care indicators were included in the qualitative synthesis and presented in this paper. Process and outcome measures were prevalent, and 5 out of the 6 quality domains were represented. No efficiency measures were identified. Moreover, structure indicators, equity and accessibility indicators, and indicators in the cardiovascular and circulatory, mental health, pediatrics, and intensive care categories were underrepresented.

CONCLUSIONS

A broad selection of quality indicators was identified from international resources, which can be used to measure the quality of physical therapy care in hospital units.

IMPACT

This review identified 178 quality of care indicators that can be used in clinical practice monitoring and quality improvement of hospital physical therapy units. The results highlight a lack of accessibility, equity, and efficiency measures for physical therapy units.

Driving factors for the utilisation of healthcare services by people with osteoarthritis in Portugal: results from a nationwide population-based study

Background

Worldwide, the current management of knee osteoarthritis appears heterogeneous, high-cost and often not based on current best evidence. The absence of epidemiological data regarding the utilisation of healthcare services may conceal the need for improvements in the management of osteoarthritis. The aim of this study is to explore the profiles of healthcare services utilisation by people with knee osteoarthritis, and to analyse their determinants, according to Andersen’s behavioural model.

Methods

We analysed a sample of 978 participants diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis from the population-based study EpiReumaPt, in Portugal. Data was collected with a structured interview, and the diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis was validated by a rheumatologist team. With the Two-step Cluster procedure, we primarily identified different profiles of healthcare utilisation according to the services most used by patients with knee osteoarthritis. Secondly, we analysed the determinants of each profile, using multinomial logistic regression, according to the predisposing characteristics, enabling factors and need variables.

Results

In our sample, a high proportion of participants are overweight or obese (82,6%, n = 748) and physically inactive (20,6%, n = 201) and a small proportion had physiotherapy management (14,4%, n = 141). We identified three profiles of healthcare utilisation: “HighUsers”; “GPUsers”; “LowUsers”. “HighUsers” represents more than 35% of the sample, and are also the participants with higher utilisation of medical appointments. “GPUsers” represent the participants with higher utilisation of general practitioner appointments. Within these profiles, age and geographic location – indicated as predisposing characteristics; employment status and healthcare insurance - as enabling factors; number of comorbidities, physical function, health-related quality of life, anxiety and physical exercise - as need variables, showed associations (p < 0,05) with the higher utilisation of healthcare services profiles.

Conclusions

Healthcare utilisation by people with knee osteoarthritis is not driven only by clinical needs. The predisposing characteristics and enabling factors associated with healthcare utilisation reveal inequities in the access to healthcare and variability in the management of people with knee osteoarthritis. Research and implementation of whole-system strategies to improve equity in the access and quality of care are paramount in order to diminish the impact of osteoarthritis at individual-, societal- and economic-level.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-07045-4.

Association between received treatment elements and satisfaction with care for patients with knee osteoarthritis seen in general practice in Denmark

OBJECTIVE

While education, exercise, and weight reduction when indicated, are recommended first-line treatments for knee osteoarthritis patients, they remain poorly implemented in favour of pain killer treatment, imaging and referral to surgery. A reason could be that patients are more satisfied with receiving these adjunctive treatment elements. This study aimed to investigate the associations between the received elements of care and the patient's satisfaction with the care for knee osteoarthritis in general practice.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

A Danish general practice.

SUBJECTS

All consecutive patients ≥30 years of age who consulted the general practitioner (GP) with chronic knee complaints during 18 months and who replied to a mailed questionnaire (n = 136).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The questionnaire addressed patient's knee-related quality of life, and overall satisfaction with care, as well as reception of seven types of information, which are known quality indicators. Information on reception of adjunctive treatment elements was obtained from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

Patient satisfaction (versus neutrality/dissatisfaction) was positively associated with reception of information on: physical activity and exercise (relative risks [RR] 1.38, 95% bootstrap percentile interval [BPI] 1.02-4.33), and the relationship between weight and osteoarthritis (1.38, 1.01-4.41). No significant associations were found for the five remaining types of information and all the adjunctive treatment elements.

CONCLUSION

Providing information as education to patients with knee osteoarthritis as part of the treatment is positively associated with satisfaction with care.KEY POINTSGeneral practitioners worry about the doctor-patient relationship when addressing recommended lifestyle changes. However, this study revealed:•Patients in general practice with knee osteoarthritis are satisfied with care after having received information on lifestyle changes, such as exercise and the relationship between weight and osteoarthritis.•Patient satisfaction was not associated with the reception of adjunctive treatment elements for osteoarthritis.

Economic evaluation of the dr. Bart app in people with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis

Objective

To evaluate the cost‐utility and cost‐effectiveness of the dr. Bart app compared to usual care in people with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knees and hips, applying a health care payer perspective.

Methods

This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 6‐month randomized controlled trial that included 427 participants. The dr. Bart app is a stand‐alone eHealth application that invites users to select pre‐formulated goals (i.e., “tiny habits”) and triggers for a healthier lifestyle. Self‐reported outcome measures were health care costs, quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) according to the EuroQol 5‐dimension 3‐level (EQ‐5D‐3L) descriptive system, the EuroQol visual analog scale (QALY VAS), patient activation measure 13 (PAM‐13), and 5 subscales of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score/Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Missing data were multiply imputed, and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.

Results

The mean ± SD age of the study participants was 62.1 ± 7.3 years, and the majority of participants were female (72%). Health care costs were lower in the intervention group compared to the group who received usual care (€−22 [95% confidence interval €−36, −3]). For QALY and QALY VAS, the probability of the dr. Bart app being cost‐effective compared to usual care was 0.71 and 0.67, respectively, at a willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) of €10,000 and 0.64 and 0.56, respectively, at a WTP of €80.000. For self‐management behavior, symptoms, pain, and activities of daily living, the probability that the dr. Bart app was cost‐effective was >0.82, and the probability that the dr. Bart app was cost‐effective in the areas of activities and quality of life was <0.40, regardless of WTP thresholds.

Conclusion

This economic evaluation showed that costs were lower for the dr. Bart app group compared to the group who received usual care. Given the noninvasive nature of the intervention and the moderate probability of it being cost‐effective for the majority of outcomes, the dr. Bart app has the potential to serve as a tool to provide education and goal setting in OA and its treatment options.

Improving osteoarthritis management in primary healthcare: results from a quasi-experimental study

Background

To improve quality of care for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), general practitioners (GPs) and physiotherapists (PTs) in a Norwegian municipality initiated an intervention. The intervention aimed to increase provision of core OA treatment (information, exercise, and weight control) prior to referral for surgery, rational use of imaging for assessing OA and improve communication between healthcare professionals. This study assessed the effectiveness of this intervention.

Methods

Forty-eight PTs and one hundred one GPs were invited to the intervention that included two interactive workshops outlining best practice and an accompanying template for PT discharge reports. Using interrupted time series research design, the study period was divided into three: pre-implementation, transition (implementation) and post-implementation. Comparing the change between pre- and post-implementation, the primary outcome was patient-reported quality of OA care measured with the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were number of PT discharge reports, information included in GP referral letters to orthopaedic surgeon, the proportion of GP referral letters indicating use of core treatment, and the use of imaging within OA assessment. Analyses involved linear mixed and logistic regression models.

Results

The PT workshop had 30 attendees, and 31 PTs and 33 GPs attended the multidisciplinary workshop. Two hundred eight and one hundred twenty-five patients completed the questionnaire during pre- and post-implementation, respectively. The adjusted model showed a small, statistically non-significant, increase in mean total score for quality of OA care (mean change = 4.96, 95% CI -0.18, 10.12, p:0.057), which was mainly related to items on OA core treatment. Patients had higher odds of reporting receipt of information on treatment alternatives (odds ratio (OR) 1.9, 95% CI 1.08, 3.24) and on self-management (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.33, 4.32) in the post-implementation phase. There was a small, statistically non-significant, increase in the proportion of GP referral letters indicating prior use of core treatment modalities. There were negligible changes in the number of PT discharge reports, in the information included in the GP referral letters, and in the use of imaging for OA assessment.

Conclusion

This study suggests that a primary care intervention including two inter-active workshops can shift the quality of care towards best practice recommendations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02876120.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-03959-6.

Patient and physician perceptions of knee and hip osteoarthritis care: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) are common, chronic conditions affecting function, morbidity and mortality. Although the societal burden is high and guidelines are available to guide management, many patients do not receive recommended care. We investigated patient and physician perspectives on barriers and facilitators to KHOA guideline-based treatment and patient experiences in living with KHOA and navigating care.

METHODS

Thirty-minute face-to-face interviews were conducted with primary care physicians and up to 4 patients of each physician at a US academic medical center. Physicians were recruited from 1 general internal medicine clinic and 1 family medicine clinic. All of their patients diagnosed with knee or hip osteoarthritis from 2008 to 2011 and under their care during the study period (2008-2015) were mailed study recruitment materials. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Content analysis was performed using QSR NVivo.

RESULTS

Six of 19 physicians (31.6%) responded to the recruitment email and completed the interview. Seventy-three patients were sent recruitment letters; 18 (24.7%) expressed interest and 11 were scheduled for and completed the interview. Many patients reported a poor understanding of osteoarthritis and available treatment options and obtained most of their information from sources other than their medical team. They expressed fear of joint pain and often modified activities to avoid all pain. Many developed complex, time intensive treatment regimens that were not always evidence-based. Physicians expressed difficulties in managing osteoarthritis given time constraints and competing agenda items at appointments. Many felt that asking patients to make lifestyle changes for weight loss and exercise was daunting and unachievable. Both physicians and patients expressed interest in obtaining osteoarthritis education.

CONCLUSIONS

Although evidence-based treatments for KHOA exist, our study highlights patient and physician barriers to receipt of this care. Better educational resources and new models of care to address these barriers may contribute to improved osteoarthritis management.

East Midlands knee pain multiple randomised controlled trial cohort study: cohort establishment and feasibility study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Knee pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) is a common cause of disability. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence OA guidelines recommend education, exercise and weight loss advice (if overweight) as core interventions before pharmacological adjuncts. However, implementation of these in primary care is often suboptimal. This study aims to develop a complex intervention with non-pharmacological and pharmacological components that can be delivered by nurses. The feasibility and acceptability of the intervention, and feasibility of undertaking a future cohort randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be explored.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In phase 1, we will develop a training programme for nurses and evaluate the fidelity and acceptability of the non-pharmacological element of the intervention. Fidelity checklists completed by the nurse will be compared with video analysis of the treatment sessions. Patients and nurses will be interviewed to determine the acceptability of the intervention and explore challenges to intervention delivery. The non-pharmacological component will be modified based on the findings. In phase 2, we will assess the feasibility of conducting a cohort RCT comprising both the pharmacological and modified non-pharmacological components. We will compare three groups: group A will receive the non-pharmacological components delivered before pharmacological components; group B will receive pharmacological components followed by the non-pharmacological components; and group C (control arm) will continue to receive usual care. Study outcomes will be collected at three time points: baseline, 13 and 26 weeks after randomisation. Qualitative interviews will be conducted with a sample of participants from each of the two active intervention arms.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol was approved by the East Midlands-Derby Research Ethics Committee (18/EM/0288) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (protocol v4.0, 10/02/2020). The study will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidance and standards. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed academic journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03670706.

Individualized predictions of changes in knee pain, quality of life and walking speed following patient education and exercise therapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis - a prognostic model study

OBJECTIVE

To facilitate shared decision-making for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), we aimed at building clinically applicable models to predict the individual change in pain intensity (VAS scale 0-100), knee-related quality of life (QoL) (KOOS QoL score 0-100) and walking speed (m/sec) immediately following two educational and 12 supervised exercise therapy sessions.

METHODS

We used data from patients with knee OA from the 'Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark' (GLA:D®) registry (n = 6,767). From 51 patient characteristics, we selected the best performing variables to predict the outcomes via random forest regression. We evaluated model performance via R². Lastly, we validated and compared our models with the average improvements via the mean differences in an independent validation data set from the GLA:D® registry (n = 2,896) collected 1 year later than the data used to build the models.

RESULTS

Validating our models including the best performing variables yielded R²s of 0.34 for pain intensity, 0.18 for knee-related QoL, and 0.07 for walking speed. The absolute mean differences between model predictions and the true outcomes were 14.65 mm, 10.32 points, and 0.14 m/s, respectively, and similar to the absolute mean differences of 17.64, 11.28 and 0.14 observed when we subtracted the average improvements from the true outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Despite including 51 potential predictors, we were unable to predict changes in individuals' pain intensity, knee-related QoL and walking speed with clinically relevant greater precision than the respective group average outcomes. Therefore, average prediction values can be used to inform patients about expected outcomes.

Effect of the dr. Bart application on healthcare use and clinical outcomes in people with osteoarthritis of the knee and/or hip in the Netherlands; a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the short-term effects of use of the dr. Bart app, compared to usual care, on the number of secondary health care consultations and clinical outcomes in people with knee/hip OA in the Netherlands.

METHOD

A randomized controlled design involving participants ≥50 years with self-reported knee and/or hip OA recruited from the community. The number of secondary health care consultations (primary outcome) and secondary outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3 and 6 months via online questionnaires. Data were analyzed using longitudinal mixed models, corrected for baseline values. Due to the design of this study, blinding of participants and researchers was not possible.

RESULTS

In total, 427 eligible participants were allocated to either the dr. Bart group (n = 214) or usual care (n = 213). We found no difference between groups in the number of secondary (i.e., orthopaedic surgeon, rheumatologist, or physician assistant) health care consultations (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.20 (95% CI: 0.67; 2.19)). We found positive treatment effects of the dr. Bart app on symptoms (2.6 (95% CI: 0.4; 4.9)), pain (3.5 (95% CI: 0.9; 6.0)), and activities of daily living (2.9 (95% CI: 0.2; 5.6)) on a 0-100 scale, higher score indicating less complaints, but not in any other secondary outcome.

CONCLUSION

The dr. Bart app did not change the number of secondary health care consultations compared to usual care. However, we found small positive effects (not clinically relevant) on pain, symptoms, and activities of daily living in people with knee/hip OA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register (Trial Number NTR6693/NL6505) (https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6505).

Inappropriate opioid dispensing in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate inappropriate opioid dispensing in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA) defined as (1) dispensing of opioids within the first year of diagnosis or (2) long-term opioid use.

DESIGN

Data from Skåne Healthcare Register was linked with the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register. Incidence proportion of dispensed opioids within first year of incident knee or hip OA diagnosis was determined in knee (n = 399,670) and hip (413,216) OA cohorts without a history of OA. The 1-year period prevalence of long-term opioid dispensing was determined in a prevalence cohort (n = 48,574 with knee and/or hip OA and n = 457,587 without OA). The proportion of OA patients with excess opioid dispensing attributable to OA was estimated using inverse probability weighted regression adjustment.

RESULTS

In the incident cohorts, 5866 and 2359 developed knee and hip OA, respectively. Within the first year after OA diagnosis 14.7% patients with knee OA and 20.7% with hip OA had an opioid dispensed. The estimated inappropriate dispensing attributable to OA was 7.4% (95% CI 6.5-8.4) for knee OA and 12.8% (95% CI 11.1-14.4) for hip OA. Among persons with prevalent knee, hip or knee and hip OA inappropriate, long-term opioid use attributable to OA was 1.3%, 2.0% and 2.4% of, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half the incident opioid dispensations to patients within their first year after knee or hip OA diagnosis are inappropriate according to current treatment guidelines. Furthermore, 2% of patients with prevalent knee or hip OA have inappropriate long-term dispensing of opioids.

Patients report inferior quality of care for knee osteoarthritis prior to assessment for knee replacement surgery - a cross-sectional study of 517 patients in Denmark

Background and purpose - Clinical care pathways for knee osteoarthritis (OA) are not always in line with clinical guidelines. We investigated (1) the patient-perceived quality of OA management, (2) which physiotherapist-delivered treatments patients with knee OA have attempted, and (3) patients' expected subsequent treatment, at the time of referral to an orthopedic surgeon.Patients and methods - This cross-sectional study included all patients with scheduled first-time appointments for knee OA at an orthopedic outpatient clinic from April 2017 to February 2018. Postal questionnaires included the 16-item OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator (OA-QI) questionnaire and questions about physiotherapist-delivered treatment for knee OA.Results - 517 of 627 (82%) eligible patients responded. Responders' (63% female) mean age was 67 years. The mean pass rate for the 16 independent quality indicators was 32% (8-74%). Sub-grouped into 4 categories, pass rates for independent quality indicators ranged from 16-52% regarding information, 9-50% regarding pain and functional assessment, 8-35% regarding referrals, and 16-74% regarding pharmacological treatment. While half of responders felt informed of physical activity benefits, only one-third had consulted a physiotherapist during the past year. Commonest physiotherapist-delivered treatments were exercise therapy for 22% and participation in the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D) program for12% of responding patients. 65% expected surgery as subsequent treatment.Interpretation - Patients with knee OA are undertreated in primary care in Denmark; however, our findings may only reflect healthcare settings that are comparably organized. Our results call for better structure and uniform pathways for primary care knee OA treatment before referral to an orthopedic surgeon.

Development and evaluation of a tailored e-self-management intervention (dr. Bart app) for knee and/or hip osteoarthritis: study protocol

Background

This paper describes (the development of) an eHealth tool (dr. Bart app) to enhance self-management and to optimize non-surgical health care utilization in patients with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis (OA) and presents a study aiming 1) to study the effectiveness of the dr. Bart app on health care use 2) to explore differences in use, usability and the clinical outcomes of the dr. Bart app between the Netherlands and Germany.

Methods

The dr. Bart app is a fully automated eHealth application and is based on the Fogg model for behavioural change, augmented with reminders, rewards and self-monitoring to reinforce app engagement and health behaviour. The dr. Bart app propose goals to a healthier lifestyle based on machine learning techniques fed by data collected in a personal profile and choosing behaviour of the app user. Patients ≥50 years with self-reported knee and/or hip OA will be eligible to participate. Participants will be recruited in the community through advertisements in local newspapers and campaigns on social media. This protocol presents a study with three arms, aiming to include 161 patients in each arm. In the Netherlands, patients are randomly allocated to usual care or dr. Bart app and in Germany all patients receive the dr. Bart app. The primary outcome of the first research question is the number of self-reported consultations in secondary health care. The primary outcome of the second research question (comparison between the Netherlands and Germany) is self-management behaviour assessed by the patient activation measure (PAM-13) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are costs, health-related quality of life, physical functioning and activity, pain, use and usability of the dr. Bart app. Data will be collected through three online questionnaires (at baseline and after 3 and 6 months after inclusion).

Discussion

This study will gain insight into the effectiveness of the dr. Bart app in the (conservative) treatment of patients with knee and/or hip OA and differences in the use and usability of the dr. Bart app between the Netherlands and Germany.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register (Trial Number NTR6693 / NL6505). Registration date: 4 September 2017.

Opioid use in knee or hip osteoarthritis: a region-wide population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To quantify opioid use in knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) patients, and to estimate the proportion of opioids in the population attributable to OA patients.

DESIGN

Population-based cohort study.

METHODS

We included 751,579 residents in southern Sweden, aged ≥35 years in 2015. Doctor-diagnosed knee or hip OA between 1998 and 2015 was the exposure. Dispensed weak and strong opioids were identified between November 2013 and October 2015 from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register (SPDR). We determined age- and sex-standardized 12-month period prevalence of opioid use from November 2014 until October 2015 and calculated prevalence ratios and incidence rate ratios adjusted for age, sex, and other socio-demographic variables. We estimated the population attributable fraction (PAF) of incident opioid use attributable to OA patients.

RESULTS

The 12-month prevalence of opioid use among OA patients was 23.7% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 23.3-24.2], which was two-fold higher compared to individuals without knee or hip OA: prevalence ratio: 2.1 [95% CI 2.1-2.1]. Similarly, OA patients were more likely to have an incident opioid dispensation, especially for strong opioids (incidence rate ratio: 2.6 [95% CI 2.5-2.7]). Population attributable tractions (PAF) of incident opioid use attributable to OA patients was 12%, 9% for weak and 17% for strong opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

Every fourth patient with knee or hip OA has opioids dispensed over a 1-year period, and 12% of incident opioid dispensations are attributable to OA and/or its related comorbidities. These results highlight that patients with knee and hip OA constitute a group of patients with an alarmingly high use of opioids.

Clinical characteristics and disability in patients with knee osteoarthritis: real world experience from Bulgaria

Objectives

Although knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a leading cause of impaired functioning among older adults globally, little is still known about the complex mechanisms of disability accumulation in these patients. The aim of the study was to analyze the clinical parameters of patients with KOA in a Bulgarian population and to determine which of these clinical characteristics define disability to the greatest extent.

Material and methods

Patients aged 40–80 years with symptomatic KOA were included. The assessment tools for pain, clinical disease severity, and disability were the pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and disease-specific questionnaires: Algofunctional Index of Lequesne, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC), and the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), respectively. Radiographs of the knees were obtained and graded according to the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) system.

Results

One hundred and thirty-two patients (81% women) participated in the study. The median values of VAS (mm), WOMAC, Lequesne, and HAQ-DI scores were 52, 37.5, 11, 0.88, respectively. Men had milder disease, resulting in lower VAS, WOMAC, Lequesne, and HAQ-DI scores and less structural damage compared to women (p < 0.05). WOMAC index correlated positively with age of the patients but not with duration of the complaints. Patients with severe and very severe pain did not differ in their HAQ-DI, disease severity and KL grading. WOMAC physical function score and Lequesne index were independent predictors for the HAQ-DI in patients with KOA.

Conclusions

Bulgarian patients with KOA had moderate disability which showed a strong relationship with physical function of WOMAC and disease severity. Multiple layers of causality coexist to determine the knee pain in Bulgarian patients with KOA.

Measurement properties for the revised patient-reported OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire

OBJECTIVES

To assess validity, reliability, responsiveness and interpretability of the revised OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator (OA-QI) questionnaire version 2 (v2) assessing patient-reported quality of osteoarthritis care.

METHODS

The OA-QI v2 (16 items, score range 0-100 (100 = best score)) was included in a longitudinal cohort study. Attendees of a 4.5 h osteoarthritis patient education programme at Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Norway, completed the OA-QI at four time points: 2 weeks before, immediately before, immediately after, and 3 months after the programme. Test-retest reliability and measurement error over a 2-week time period were assessed in those that had not seen health professionals in the interim. Construct validity and responsiveness were assessed with predefined hypotheses. Floor and ceiling effects, smallest detectable change (SDC_95%) and minimal important change (MIC) were assessed to evaluate interpretability.

RESULTS

The intraclass correlation coefficient for all 16 items was 0.89. For single items the test-retest kappa estimates ranged 0.38-0.85 and percent agreement 69-92%. Construct validity was acceptable with all six predefined hypotheses confirmed. Responsiveness was acceptable with 33 of 48 and three of four predefined hypotheses confirmed for single items and all items, respectively. There were no floor or ceiling effects. The SDC_95% was 29.1 and 3.0 at the individual and group levels, respectively. MIC was 20.4.

CONCLUSIONS

The OA-QI v2 had higher reliability estimates compared to v1, showed acceptable validity, and is the recommended version for future use. The results of responsiveness testing further support the use of the OA-QI v2 as an outcome measure in studies aiming to improve osteoarthritis care.

Gaps in appropriate use of treatment strategies in osteoarthritis

Optimal management of osteoarthritis (OA) requires a combination of therapies, with behavioral (e.g., exercise and weight management) and rehabilitative components at the core, accompanied by pharmacological treatments and, in later stages, consideration of joint replacement surgery. Although multiple sets of OA treatment guidelines have been developed, there are gaps in the implementation of these recommendations. Key areas of concern include the underuse of exercise, weight management, and other behavioral and rehabilitation strategies as well as the overuse of opioid analgesics. In this review, we describe the major categories of treatment strategies for OA, including self-management, physical activity, weight management, physical therapy and other rehabilitative therapies, pharmacotherapies, and joint replacement surgery. For each category, we discuss the current evidence base to report on appropriate use, data regarding adherence to treatment recommendations, and potential approaches to optimize use.

Cross-cultural adaptation and implementation of Good Life with osteoarthritis in Denmark (GLA:D™): group education and exercise for hip and knee osteoarthritis is feasible in Canada

OBJECTIVE

Adapt and evaluate the feasibility of implementing Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D^TM) in Canada for people with mild to severe hip/knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Patients triaged to non-surgical management participated in two education sessions and 12 supervised, neuromuscular exercise classes. We used the RE-AIM implementation framework evaluating outcomes of Reach, Effectiveness/Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance. Patients completed surveys pre-program and at 3 months follow-up. Program fidelity was evaluated at four observations against a priori criteria. We conducted semi-structured interviews with therapists post-program.

RESULTS

72 patients consented to participate, 59 started the program and one withdrew on physician advice. The remaining 58 provided follow-up data. Mean age was 67 years; 78% were female and 52% had body mass index (BMI) >25. The effect of the program was demonstrated: 40% improvement in pain with 59% achieving a clinically important improvement of ≥2 points on the Numeric Pain Rating scale. Statistically significant improvement also occurred in the Hip disability/Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales. 24% reported increased physical activity. Program fidelity was demonstrated with all criteria met. Therapists emphasized that rolling recruitment allowed appropriate supervision and resulted in participants encouraging each other. 99% of participants indicated they benefitted from and were satisfied with the program and 90% reported using the knowledge daily. 52% were willing to pay >$250 Cdn for the program.

CONCLUSION

GLA:D^TM implementation was feasible in the Canadian context with results similar to those of >7,000 participants in Denmark. Implementation and evaluation of GLA:D^TM Canada is now occurring nationally.

Osteoarthritis: Models for appropriate care across the disease continuum

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of pain and disability worldwide. Despite the existence of evidence-based treatments and guidelines, substantial gaps remain in the quality of OA management. There is underutilization of behavioral and rehabilitative strategies to prevent and treat OA as well as a lack of processes to tailor treatment selection according to patient characteristics and preferences. There are emerging efforts in multiple countries to implement models of OA care, particularly focused on improving nonsurgical management. Although these programs vary in content and setting, key lessons learned include the importance of support from all stakeholders, consistent program delivery and tools, a coherent team to run the program, and a defined plan for outcome assessment. Efforts are still needed to develop, deliver, and evaluate models of care across the spectrum of OA, from prevention through end-stage disease, in order to improve care for this highly prevalent global condition.

Are physiotherapists adhering to quality indicators for the management of knee osteoarthritis? An observational study

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common musculoskeletal condition that often leads to pain, stiffness and disability. Physiotherapy plays an important role in the management of knee OA, however we hypothesize discordance between physiotherapists' practice and existing guideline recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to measure physiotherapists' guideline adherence for knee OA. Additionally, determinants for guideline adherence at the professional and organizational level were explored, to find clues for improvement.

METHOD

A survey was performed among Belgian physiotherapists. Guideline adherence was measured with a set of 9 quality indicators, developed for the Belgian primary healthcare system, applicable for physiotherapists and extracted from evidence-based guidelines. Treatment modalities that do not contribute to high quality care were also examined.

RESULTS

284 Physiotherapists responded to the survey. Compliance to the quality indicators varied between 27% and 98%. Quality indicator compliance above 80% was found for: education on the importance of exercise, delivering functional and strength exercise therapy, patient tailored exercise program, instruction of patients in appropriate exercises and referral for sports activities after therapy. Quality indicator compliance less than 50% was found for: education on the importance of weight loss, providing self-management strategies, spreading treatment session over longer periods and regular evaluations of the exercise therapy. For treatment modalities that do not contribute to high quality care, massage (49%) and cold application (24%) were most frequently applied.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed large variations in adherence to quality indicators in OA management by physiotherapists. Improvement strategies should focus on quality indicators related to long-term treatment options.

Patient-reported quality indicators for osteoarthritis: a patient and public generated self-report measure for primary care

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

People with osteoarthritis desire high quality care, support and information. However, the quality of care for people with OA in general practice is not routinely collected. Quality Indicators can be used to benefit patients by measuring whether minimum standards of quality care are being met from a patient perspective. The aim of this study was to describe how a Research User Group (RUG) worked alongside researchers to co-produce a set of self-reported quality indicators for people with osteoarthritis when visiting their general practitioner or practice nurse (primary care). These were required in the MOSAICS study, which developed and evaluated a new model of supported self-management of OA to implement the NICE quality standards for OA. This article describes the public involvement in the MOSAICS study. This was 1) the co-development by RUG members and researchers of an Osteoarthritis Quality Indicators United Kingdom (OA QI (UK)) questionnaire for use in primary care, and 2) the comparison of the OA QI (UK) with a similar questionnaire developed in Norway. This study shows how important and effective a research user group can be in working with researchers in developing quality care indicators for osteoarthritis for use in a research study and, potentially, routine use in primary care. The questionnaire is intended to benefit patients by enabling the assessment of the quality of primary care for osteoarthritis from a patient's perspective. The OA QI (UK) has been used to examine differences in the quality of osteoarthritis care in four European countries.

ABSTRACT

Background People with osteoarthritis (OA) desire high quality care, support and information about OA. However, the quality of care for people with OA in general practice is not routinely collected. Quality Indicators (QI) can be used to benefit patients by measuring whether minimum standards of quality care (e.g. NICE quality standards) are being met from a patient perspective. A Research User Group (RUG) worked with researchers to co-produce a set of self-report, patient-generated QIs for OA. The QIs were intended for use in the MOSAICS study, which developed and evaluated a new model of supported self-management of OA to implement the NICE guidelines. We report on 1) the co-development of the OA QI (UK) questionnaire for primary care; and 2) the comparison of the content of the OA QI (UK) questionnaire with a parallel questionnaire developed in Norway for the Musculoskeletal Pain in Ullensaker (MUST) study. Methods Researchers were invited to OA RUG meetings. Firstly, RUG members were asked to consider factors important to patients consulting their general practitioner (GP) for OA and then each person rated their five most important. RUG members then discussed these in relation to a systematic review of OA QIs in order to form a list of OA QIs from a patient perspective. RUG members suggested wording and response options for a draft OA QI (UK) questionnaire to assess the QIs. Finally RUG members commented on draft and final versions of the questionnaire and how it compared with a translated Norwegian OA-QI questionnaire. Results RUG members (5 males, 5 females; aged 52-80 years) attended up to four meetings. RUG members ranked 20 factors considered most important to patients consulting their GP for joint pain. Following discussion, a list of eleven patient-reported QIs for OA consultations were formed. RUG members then suggested the wording and response options of 16 draft items - four QIs were split into two or more questionnaire items to avoid multiple dimensions of care quality within a single item. On comparison of this to the Norwegian OA-QI questionnaire, RUG members commented that both questionnaires contained seven similar QIs. The RUG members and researchers agreed to adopt the Norwegian OA-QI wording for four of these items. RUG members also recommended adopting an additional seven items from the Norwegian OA-QI with some minor word changes to improve their suitability for patients in the UK. One other item from the draft OA QI (UK) questionnaire was retained and eight items were excluded, resulting in a 15-item final version. Conclusions This study describes the development of patient-reported quality indicators for OA primary care derived by members of a RUG group, working in partnership with the research team throughout the study. The OA QI (UK) supports the NICE quality standards for OA and they have been successfully used to assess the quality of OA consultations in primary care in the MOSAICS study. The OA QI (UK) has the potential for routine use in primary care to assess the quality of OA care provided to patients. Ongoing research using both the UK and Norwegian OA-QI questionnaires is assessing the self-reported quality of OA care in different European populations.