Author:
Mills Kathryn,Brewster Anne-Marie,Hackett Danella,Cheung Chris,Solomon Michael,Naylor Justine
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
National and international clinical practice guidelines have stratified the value of osteoarthritis (OA) interventions. Interventions with strong evidence supporting effectiveness and benefit are ‘high value care’. Appointment attendance, audits and practitioner surveys are widely used to determine frequency of recommendations and adherence to high value care. Greater patient reported data is needed in this evidence base.
Objective
To describe the frequency of high and low value care being recommended and undertaken by individuals awaiting OA-related lower limb arthroplasty. To examine sociodemographic or disease-related variables associated with being recommended different levels of care.
Methods
A cross-sectional survey of 339 individuals was conducted in metropolitan and regional hospitals and surgeon consultation rooms across New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Individuals attending pre-arthroplasty clinics/appointments for primary arthroplasty of the hip and/or knee were invited to participate. Respondents were asked what intervention(s) they were recommended by healthcare practitioners, or other sources of information, and what they had undertaken within two years prior to hip or knee arthroplasty. Interventions were classified as core, recommended, and low value care aligned with the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) guidelines. We considered core and recommended interventions high value. The proportion of recommended and undertaken interventions were calculated. We used backwards stepwise multivariate multinomial regression to address aim three.
Results
Simple analgesics were most frequently recommended (68% [95% CI 62.9 to 73.1]). 24.8% [20.2 to 29.7] of respondents were recommended high value care only. 75.2% [70.2 to 79.7] of respondents were recommended at least one low value intervention. More than 75% of recommended interventions were undertaken. Respondents awaiting hip arthroplasty, living outside a major city and without private health insurance had greater odds of recommended rather than core interventions being advised.
Conclusion
While high value interventions are being recommended to individuals living with OA, in most cases they are combined with recommendations for low value care. This is concerning given the high rates of uptake for recommended interventions. Based on patient reported data, disease-related and sociodemographic variables influence the level of care recommended.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Rheumatology
Reference23 articles.
1. NICE. : Osteoarthritis: Care and Management in Adults. In. Edited by Excellence NIfHaC. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK); 2014.
2. Bannuru RR, Osani MC, Vaysbrot EE, Arden NK, Bennell K, Bierma-Zeinstra SMA, Kraus VB, Lohmander LS, Abbott JH, Bhandari M, et al. OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee, hip, and polyarticular osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2019;27(11):1578–89.
3. Jevsevar DS. Treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: evidence-based guideline, 2nd edition. JAAOS - Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2013, 21(9):571–576.
4. RACGP. Guideline for the management of knee and hip osteoarthritis. 2nd ed. edn. East Melbourne, Vic: The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners; 2018. pp. 1–82.
5. Basedow M, Williams H, Shanahan EM, Runciman WB, Esterman A. Australian GP management of osteoarthritis following the release of the RACGP guideline for the non-surgical management of hip and knee osteoarthritis. BMC Research Notes 2019:1–8.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献