Rates of hip and knee joint replacement amongst different ethnic groups in England: an analysis of National Joint Registry data.

OBJECTIVE: Despite a health care system that is free at the point of delivery, ethnic minorities may not always get care equitable to that of White patients in England. We examined whether ethnic differences exist in joint replacement rates and surgical practice in England. DESIGN: 373,613 hip and 428,936 knee National Joint Registry (NJR) primary replacement patients had coded ethnicity in Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). Age and gender adjusted observed/expected ratios of hip and knee replacements amongst ethnic groups were compared using indirect standardisation. Associations between ethnic group and type of procedure were explored and effects of demographic, clinical and hospital-related factors examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Adjusted standardised observed/expected ratios were substantially lower in Blacks and Asians than Whites for hip replacement (Blacks 0.33 [95% CI, 0.31-0.35], Asians 0.20 [CI, 0.19-0.21]) and knee replacement (Blacks 0.64 [CI, 0.61-0.67], Asians 0.86 % [CI, 0.84-0.88]). Blacks were more likely to receive uncemented hip replacements (Blacks 52%, Whites 37%, Asians 44%; P < 0.001). Black men and women aged <70 years were less likely to receive unicondylar or patellofemoral knee replacements than Whites (men 10% vs 15%, P = 0.001; women 6% vs 14%, P < 0.001). After adjustment for demographic, clinical and hospital-related factors, Blacks were more likely to receive uncemented hip replacement (OR 1.43 [CI, 1.11-1.84]). CONCLUSIONS: In England, hip and knee replacement rates and prosthesis type given differ amongst ethnic groups. Whether these reflect differences in clinical need or differential access to treatment requires urgent investigation.

Central sensitization as a determinant of patients' benefit from total hip and knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Discrepancies exist between osteoarthritic joint changes and pain severity before and after total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement. This study investigated whether the interaction between pre-operative widespread hyperalgesia and severity of radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) was associated with pain severity before and after joint replacement. METHODS: Data were analysed from 232 patients receiving THR and 241 receiving TKR. Pain was assessed pre-operatively and at 12 months post-operatively using the WOMAC Pain Scale. Widespread hyperalgesia was assessed through forearm pressure pain thresholds (PPTs). Radiographic OA was evaluated using the Kellgren and Lawrence scheme. Statistical analysis was conducted using multilevel models, and adjusted for confounding variables. RESULTS: Pre-operative: In knee patients, there was weak evidence that the effect of PPTs on pain severity was greater in patients with more severe OA (Grade 3 OA: ß = 0.96 vs. Grade 4: ß = 4.03), indicating that in these patients higher PPTs (less widespread hyperalgesia) was associated with less severe pain. In hip patients, the effect of PPTs on pain did not differ with radiographic OA (Grade 3 OA: ß = 3.95 vs. Grade 4: ß = 3.67). Post-operative: There was weak evidence that knee patients with less severe OA who had greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted less from surgery (Grade 3 OA: ß = 2.28; 95% CI -1.69 to 6.25). Conversely, there was weak evidence that hip patients with more severe OA who had greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted more from surgery (Grade 4 OA: ß = -2.92; 95% CI -6.58 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Widespread sensitization may be a determinant of how much patients benefit from joint replacement, but the effect varies by joint and severity of structural joint changes. SIGNIFICANCE: Pre-operative widespread hyperalgesia and radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) severity may influence how much patients benefit from joint replacement. Patients undergoing knee replacement with less severe OA and greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted less from surgery than patients with less hyperalgesia. Patients undergoing hip replacement with more severe OA and greater widespread hyperalgesia benefitted more than patients with less hyperalgesia.

Persistent pain after knee replacement: do factors associated with pain vary with degree of patient dissatisfaction?

OBJECTIVE: Up to 20% of patients experience long-term pain and dissatisfaction following knee replacement. The aim of this study was to investigate factors associated with persistent pain following knee replacement and their implications for patient satisfaction. DESIGN: A case-controlled analysis compared patients with established persistent pain with patients who were pain-free. 2:1 frequency matching for age, gender, time from surgery and prosthesis was performed. 1310 patients were approached and 100 patients with persistent pain and 200 matched pain-free controls were included. Variables assessed included mechanical, biological, psychosocial and generalised factors. RESULTS: The study found that the degree of dissatisfaction experienced by the patient with persistent pain following knee replacement affected the factors associated with pain. In the most dissatisfied patients, pain was associated with instability in the coronal plane (OR 19.8, 95% CI 3.8-104.0), stiffness (OR 6.4, 95% CI 2.3-18.4) and negative social support (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.1-10.0). In patients who were less dissatisfied, pain was associated with patellofemoral problems (OR 10.3, 95% CI 3.6-29.6), elevated BMI (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.4-5.7) and reduced local pain thresholds (OR 4.4, 95% CI 2.0-9.6). Depression (OR 13.6, 95% CI 1.9-96.6) and presence of proximal tibial tenderness (OR 23.5 95% CI 7.8-70.7) were strongly associated with pain regardless of level of satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with persistent pain after knee replacement are dissatisfied. This study identifies factors associated with the worst pain outcomes, which lead to the greatest levels of dissatisfaction. Particular efforts with a holistic multidisciplinary approach should be focused towards these "red flag" factors in order to minimise persistent pain after knee replacement.

The power and value of placebo and nocebo in painful osteoarthritis.

This paper reviews some recent advances in our understanding of the effects of sham or dummy interventions on pain and other symptoms in osteoarthritis (OA), and outlines two new approaches to the investigation of placebo and nocebo effects. We argue that the placebo effect provides us with a valuable way of investigating the nature of conditions like OA. For example, by examining which symptoms, biochemical markers or imaging features do or do not respond to placebo, we might learn more about the relationships between pathology and symptoms in OA. Placebo and nocebo effects are positive or negative outcomes resulting from the human interactions and contexts in which healthcare consultations take place. Subtle changes in behaviours and the environments in which consultations take place can have major effects on pain and other symptoms being experienced by people with OA. Nocebo effects are particularly powerful, leading to many health-care professionals (HCPs) causing unintended harm to their clients. Based on our own research, we conclude that beneficial outcomes are most likely to occur when both the (HCP) and the client feel safe and relaxed, and when the experiences of the client are validated by the (HCP). These findings have important implications for clinical practice. We believe that research in this field needs to be 'trans-disciplinary', escaping from the constraints of the purely biomedical, deterministic, positivist paradigm of most medical research. We provide the example of our own work which combines performance studies and scholarship, with psychology and medicine.

Selecting, assessing and interpreting measures of function for patients with severe hip pathology: The need for caution.

INTRODUCTION: It is not always possible to use a combination of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), performance tests and clinician-administrated measures to assess physical function prior to hip surgery. We hypothesised that there would be low correlations between these three types of measure and that they would be associated with different patients' characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the preoperative information of 125 participants listed for hip replacement. The WOMAC-function subscale, Harris Hip Score (HHS) and walk, step and balance tests were assessed by questionnaire or during a clinic visit. Participant's socio-demographics and medical characteristics were also collected. Correlations between functional measures were investigated with correlation coefficients. Regression models were used to test the association between the patient's characteristics and each of the three types of functional measures. RESULTS: None of the correlations between the PROM, clinician-administrated measure and performance tests were very high (<0.90). Associations between patient's characteristics and functional scores varied by type of measure. Psychological status was associated with the PROM (P-value<0.0001) but not with the other measures. Age was associated with the performance test measures (P-value ranging from ≤0.01 to <0.0001) but not with the PROM. The clinician-administered measure was not associated with age or psychological status. DISCUSSION: Substantial discrepancies exist when assessing hip function using a PROM, functional test or a clinician-administered test. Moreover, these assessment methods are influenced differently by patient's characteristics. Clinicians should supplement their pre-surgery assessment of function with patient-reported measure to include the patient's perspective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, observational cross-sectional study.

A new responder criterion (relative effect per patient (REPP) > 0.2) externally validated in a large total hip replacement multicenter cohort (EUROHIP).

OBJECTIVE: To validate a new method to identify responders (relative effect per patient (REPP) >0.2) using the OMERACT-OARSI criteria as gold standard in a large multicentre sample. METHOD: The REPP ([score before - after treatment]/score before treatment) was calculated for 845 patients of a large multicenter European cohort study for THR. The patients with a REPP >0.2 were defined as responders. The responder rate was compared to the gold standard (OMERACT-OARSI criteria) using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for sensitivity, specificity and percentage of appropriately classified patients. RESULTS: With the criterion REPP>0.2 85.4% of the patients were classified as responders, applying the OARSI-OMERACT criteria 85.7%. The new method had 98.8% sensitivity, 94.2% specificity and 98.1% of the patients were correctly classified compared to the gold standard. CONCLUSION: The external validation showed a high sensitivity and also specificity of a new criterion to identify a responder compared to the gold standard method. It is simple and has no uncertainties due to a single classification criterion.

Individuals with high bone mass have an increased prevalence of radiographic knee osteoarthritis.

We previously reported an association between high bone mass (HBM) and a bone-forming phenotype of radiographic hip osteoarthritis (OA). As knee and hip OA have distinct risk factors, in this study we aimed to determine (i) whether HBM is also associated with knee OA, and (ii) whether the HBM knee OA phenotype demonstrates a similar pattern of radiographic features to that observed at the hip. HBM cases (defined by DXA BMD Z-scores) from the UK-based HBM study were compared with unaffected family controls and general population controls from the Chingford and Hertfordshire cohort studies. A single blinded observer graded AP weight-bearing knee radiographs for features of OA (Kellgren-Lawrence score, osteophytes, joint space narrowing (JSN), sclerosis) using an atlas. Analyses used logistic regression, adjusting a priori for age and gender, and additionally for BMI as a potential mediator of the HBM-OA association, using Stata v12. 609 HBM knees in 311 cases (mean age 60.8years, 74% female) and 1937 control knees in 991 controls (63.4years, 81% female) were analysed. The prevalence of radiographic knee OA, defined as Kellgren-Lawrence grade≥2, was increased in cases (31.5% vs. 20.9%), with age and gender adjusted OR [95% CI] 2.38 [1.81, 3.14], p<0.001. The association between HBM and osteophytosis was stronger than that for JSN, both before and after adjustment for BMI which attenuated the ORs for knee OA and osteophytes in cases vs. controls by approximately 50%. Our findings support a positive association between HBM and knee OA. This association was strongest for osteophytes, suggesting HBM confers a general predisposition to a subtype of OA characterised by increased bone formation.

Prevalence of radiographic hip osteoarthritis is increased in high bone mass.

OBJECTIVE: Epidemiological studies have shown an association between increased bone mineral density (BMD) and osteoarthritis (OA), but whether this represents cause or effect remains unclear. In this study, we used a novel approach to investigate this question, determining whether individuals with High Bone Mass (HBM) have a higher prevalence of radiographic hip OA compared with controls. DESIGN: HBM cases came from the UK-based HBM study: HBM was defined by BMD Z-score. Unaffected relatives of index cases were recruited as family controls. Age-stratified random sampling was used to select further population controls from the Chingford and Hertfordshire cohort studies. Pelvic radiographs were pooled and assessed by a single observer blinded to case-control status. Analyses used logistic regression, adjusted for age, gender and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: 530 HBM hips in 272 cases (mean age 62.9 years, 74% female) and 1702 control hips in 863 controls (mean age 64.8 years, 84% female) were analysed. The prevalence of radiographic OA, defined as Croft score ≥3, was higher in cases compared with controls (20.0% vs 13.6%), with adjusted odds ratio (OR) [95% CI] 1.52 [1.09, 2.11], P = 0.013. Osteophytes (OR 2.12 [1.61, 2.79], P < 0.001) and subchondral sclerosis (OR 2.78 [1.49, 5.18], P = 0.001) were more prevalent in cases. However, no difference in the prevalence of joint space narrowing (JSN) was seen (OR 0.97 [0.72, 1.33], P = 0.869). CONCLUSIONS: An increased prevalence of radiographic hip OA and osteophytosis was observed in HBM cases compared with controls, in keeping with a positive association between HBM and OA and suggesting that OA in HBM has a hypertrophic phenotype.

Individualisation of drug treatments for patients with long-term conditions: a review of concepts.

OBJECTIVES: Patients and policy makers advocate that drug treatments should be individualised. However, the term is used in a variety of ways. We set out to identify the range of related terminology and concepts in the general field of individualisation, map out the relationships between these concepts and explore how patients' perspectives are considered. DESIGN: We consulted members of an established patient and public involvement group about their experience of medicine taking for long-term conditions and their ideas about individualisation. We then conducted a scoping review of the literature to explore how terms surrounding individualisation of drug treatment are used and defined in the literature, and to explore the extent to which patients' perspectives are represented, with a view to informing future recommendations as to how individualisation can be operationalised. METHODS: We identified relevant literature using a range of search strategies. Two researchers independently extracted definitions of terms using a template. Inductive and deductive methods were used to explore the data. RESULTS: Definitions were categorised according to the following themes: medical management; pharmacogenetics, the patient's perspective; interactions between the healthcare provider and patient and management of long-term conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Within the literature reviewed, the involvement of patients in the ongoing management of drug treatment was largely absent. We propose the use of a new term 'mutually agreed tailoring' (MAT). This describes the ongoing pharmacological management of conditions that incorporates patients' specific needs, experiences and existing strategies for using their medications, and the professionals' clinical judgement. This usually includes patients monitoring their symptoms and, with the support of the professional, making appropriate product, dose or timing adjustments as necessary. Our previous work suggests that many patients and doctors are successfully practising MAT, so we suggest that a formal description may facilitate wider utilisation of strategies that will improve patient outcomes.

Does measuring the range of motion of the hip and knee add to the assessment of disability in people undergoing joint replacement?

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Range of motion (ROM) is a core component of some commonly used measures of disability, such as the American Knee Society Score and Harris Hip Score. However, the relationship between ROM and function is contested. The aim of this cross-sectional analysis was to investigate the relationship between pre-operative range of motion (ROM) and disability in patients undergoing hip and knee joint replacement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred and forty-nine patients recorded on NHS records as listed for joint replacement completed a range of measures prior to surgery. Pre-operative hip or knee ROM was measured by a trained research nurse using a hand-held goniometer. Joint pain severity was assessed using the WOMAC Pain Scale. Self-report activity limitations and participation restrictions were measured with the WOMAC Function Scale and the Aberdeen Impairment, Activity Limitation and Participation Restriction Measure. Observed activity limitations were assessed through three performance tests: 20-metre timed walk, sit-to-stand-to-sit, and 20-cm step tests. RESULTS: Pre-operative hip and knee ROM correlated weakly with self-report activity limitations (0.11 to 0.43), observed activity limitations (0.09 to 0.39) and self-report participation restrictions (-0.32 to 0.06). In comparison to ROM, correlations between joint pain and self-report activity limitations and participation restrictions were consistently moderate-high (-0.53 to 0.80). However, patients with restricted knee joint flexion (<110°) had significantly worse pain, activity limitations and participation restrictions than patients with non-restricted flexion (≥110°). Patients with restricted hip joint flexion (<95°) had greater activity limitations on some measures than patients with non-restricted flexion (>95°). DISCUSSION: This study suggests that modest restrictions of ROM are of little relevance to functional ability but that a certain amount of flexion is required for adequate function. We recommend that ROM is not the best means of assessing patients' disability prior to surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III - cohort study.

Body mass index is not a clinically meaningful predictor of patient reported outcomes of primary hip replacement surgery: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe whether body mass index (BMI) is a clinically meaningful predictor of patient reported outcomes following primary total hip replacement (THR) surgery. DESIGN: Combined data from prospective cohort studies. We obtained information from four cohorts of patients receiving primary THR for osteoarthritis: Exeter Primary Outcomes Study (EPOS) (n = 1431); EUROHIP (n = 1327); Elective Orthopaedic Centre (n = 2832); and St. Helier (n = 787). The exposure of interest was pre-operative BMI. Confounding variables included: age, sex, SF-36 mental health, comorbidities, fixed flexion, analgesic use, college education, OA in other joints, expectation of less pain, radiographic K&L grade, ASA grade, years of hip pain. The primary outcome was the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Regression models describe the association of BMI on outcome adjusting for all confounders. RESULTS: For a 5-unit increase in BMI, the attained 12-month OHS decreases by 0.78 points 95%CI (0.27-1.28), P-value 0.001. Compared to people of normal BMI (20-25), those in the obese class II (BMI 35-40) would have a 12-month OHS that is 2.34 points lower. Although statistically significant this effect is small and not clinically meaningful in contrast to the substantial change in OHS seen across all BMI groupings. In obese class II patients achieved a 22.2 point change in OHS following surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients achieved substantial change in OHS after THR across all BMI categories, which greatly outweighs the small difference in attained post-operative score. The findings suggest BMI should not present a barrier to access THR in terms of PROMs.

The association between pre-operative pain sensitisation and chronic pain after knee replacement: an exploratory study.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain after total knee replacement (TKR) is a prevalent condition, affecting about 20% of patients. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between pre-operative pain thresholds and chronic pain after TKR. DESIGN: Patients listed for a TKR because of osteoarthritis participated in a Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) session prior to surgery. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and hot pain thresholds were assessed at the osteoarthritic knee and the forearm. Patients were followed-up at 1-year after TKR, and the severity of pain in the replaced knee was assessed using the WOMAC Pain score. Pre-operative median QST thresholds were compared to thresholds from a normative database collected from 50 people with no knee pain. The relationship between pre-operative pain thresholds and pain severity post TKR were tested using correlations. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients participated in a pre-operative QST session and completed a 1-year WOMAC Pain score. Pre-operatively, patients demonstrated evidence of localised (knee) and widespread (forearm) pain sensitisation in response to pressure stimuli compared to healthy participants. Pre-operative PPTs at the forearm were found to be significantly correlated with 1-year WOMAC Pain scores (r = 0.37, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides preliminary evidence that pre-operative widespread pain sensitisation, measured using pressure algometry, may be associated with chronic pain after TKR. Further research is needed to explore the predictive value of an assessment of pre-operative widespread pain sensitisation in identifying who is likely to develop chronic pain after TKR.

Doctors' understanding of individualisation of drug treatments: a qualitative interview study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore doctors' understanding of individualisation of drug treatments, and identify the methods used to achieve individualisation. DESIGN: In this exploratory study, we used in-depth qualitative interviews with doctors to gain insight into their understanding of the term 'individualised treatments' and the methods that they use to achieve it. PARTICIPANTS: 16 general practitioners in 6 rural and 10 urban practices, 2 geriatricians and 2 clinical academics were recruited. SETTING: Primary and secondary care in South West of England. RESULTS: Understanding of individualisation varied between doctors, and their initial descriptions of individualisation were not always consistent with subsequent examples of the patients they had treated. Understandings of, and methods used to achieve, individualised treatment were frequently discussed in relation to making drug treatment decisions. Few doctors spoke of using strategies to support patients to individualise their own treatments after the consultation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite its widespread use, variation in doctors' understanding of the term individualisation highlights the need for it to be defined. Efforts are needed to develop effective methods that would offer a structured approach to support patients to manage their treatments after consultations.

Associations between pre-operative radiographic changes and outcomes after total knee joint replacement for osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of pre-operative X-ray changes on the response to total knee joint replacement (TKR). METHODS: We included patients from one centre who underwent primary TKR (n = 478) for osteoarthritis in 2006 and 2007. The International Knee Society score (IKSS) and short form health survey were collected pre-operatively and at 1 and 2 years after surgery. Pre-operative radiographs were read to assess Kellgren and Lawrence (K-L) grading, individual radiographic features using the OARSI atlas, and subchondral bone attrition using the Ahlbach method. The main independent variable was a modified (K-L) grade. The outcome variables were the IKSS pain and function scores. Covariates included demographic features, co-morbidities, baseline pain and function, prosthesis type, and the use of patella resurfacing. Multivariable linear regression models were created to assess the relationships between pre-operative X-ray findings and pain and function outcomes. RESULTS: On average, pain and function improved greatly following surgery. However, pain relief was unsatisfactory in about 30%, and functional improvement suboptimal in about 50%. OR (95% CI) for ongoing moderate-severe pain at 12 months for modified K-L grades; <3: 5.39 (1.23-15.69), 3a: 2.62 (1.21-5.67), 3b: 1.81 (1.00-3.26), 4a: 2.06 (1.05-4.05) when compared to 4b. OR (95% CI) for poor function at 12 months were; 3a: 2.81 (1.23-6.39) and 4a: 2.45 (1.22-4.91), when compared to 4b. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with more severe radiographic knee damage at the time of surgery are most likely to have substantial gains in terms of both pain relief and improved function as a result of a TKR.

The assessment of persistent pain after joint replacement.

This study used 'think aloud' to explore issues around using a standardised questionnaire to assess persistent pain after joint replacement. Twenty participants with moderate-extreme persistent pain in their replaced hip or knee completed the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG) while 'thinking aloud'. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Completion of the CPG by patients was influenced by four issues: challenges with the question wording or response options on the CPG items; the fluctuating nature of pain and functional limitations; the need to account for co-morbidities and pain elsewhere; and adjustment to pain. These issues reflect those that have arisen previously in patients with musculoskeletal pain, and need to be considered when assessing persistent joint pain, both before and after joint replacement.

Pre-operative expectation predicts 12-month post-operative outcome among patients undergoing primary total hip replacement in European orthopaedic centres.

OBJECTIVE: Patients' expectations of surgery may be related to outcomes of joint replacement. The aims of this study were to: (1). Identify patient characteristics associated with pre-operative expectations of total hip replacement (THR); (2). Explore whether pre-operative expectations predict surgical outcomes 12-months post-THR. METHOD: The European collaborative database of cost and practice patterns of THR (EUROHIP) study consists of 1327 consenting patients coming to primary THR for osteoarthritis (OA) across 20 European orthopaedic centres. Ordered logistic regression modelling was used to look at the association between patients pre-operative expectations and baseline characteristics (age, sex, education, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) status, Kellgren & Lawrence (K&L) grade, body mass index (BMI), medication use, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) score, EQ5D (EuroQol) score). The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT)/Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) responder criteria were used to classify patients as improved/not improved 12-months post-THR. Logistic regression modelling was used to explore whether pre-operative expectations predict response to THR. RESULTS: Greater numbers of pre-operative expectations were associated with younger age, women, increasing BMI, and more education. The more pre-operative expectations a patient had, the more likely they were to improve after surgery. Each individual expectation a patient had, was associated with a 34% increase in improvement [95% confidential interval (CI) 1%-78%]. Analyses within dimensions of the WOMAC suggest the association is strongest for stiffness and function. CONCLUSION: There is large variation in patients' pre-operative expectations of THR. Greater numbers of pre-operative expectations were associated with improvement following THR. This appears to be driven more by stiffness and function. These findings have implications for informed patient-clinician decision-making.

Test-retest reliability of Quantitative Sensory Testing in knee osteoarthritis and healthy participants.

Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST), which assesses somatosensory function by recording participant's responses to external stimuli of controlled intensity, is a useful tool to provide insight into the complex pathophysiology of osteoarthritis (OA) pain. However, QST is not commonly used in rheumatology because the test-retest reliability properties of QST in OA patients have not yet been established. This brief report presents the finding of a study which assessed the test-retest reliability of light touch thresholds, pressure pain thresholds, thermal sensation thresholds and thermal pain thresholds in 50 knee OA patients and 50 healthy participants. Pressure pain thresholds were found to be the least variable measurement, as median thresholds did not differ significantly over the 1 week period and the results were highly correlated. This provides support for the inclusion of pressure algometry in studies assessing pain perception abnormalities in OA.

Gender inequity in the provision of care for hip disease: population-based cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine gender differences along the care pathway to total hip replacement. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of 26,046 individuals aged 35 years and over in Avon and Somerset. Participants completed a questionnaire asking about care provision at five milestones on the pathway to total hip replacement. Those reporting hip disease were invited to a clinical examination. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) [95% confidence intervals (CI)] for provision of care to women compared with men. RESULTS: 3169 people reported hip pain, 2018 were invited for clinical examination, and 1405 attended (69.6%). After adjustment for age and disease severity, women were less likely than men to have consulted their general practitioner (OR 0.78, 95%-CI 0.61-1.00), as likely as men to have received drug therapy for hip pain in the previous year (OR 0.96, 95%-CI 0.74-1.24), but less likely to have been referred to specialist care (OR 0.53, 95%-CI 0.40-0.70), to have consulted an orthopaedic surgeon (OR 0.50, 95%-CI 0.32-0.78), or to be on a waiting list for total hip replacement (OR 0.41, 95%-CI 0.20-0.87). Differences remained in the 746 people who had sought care from their general practitioner, and after adjustment for willingness and fitness for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: There are gender inequalities in provision of care for hip disease in England, which are not fully accounted for by gender differences in care seeking and treatment preferences. Differences in referral to specialist care by general practitioners might unwittingly contribute to this inequity. Accurate information about availability, benefits and risks of hip replacement for providers and patients, and continuing education to ensure that clinicians interpret and correct patients' assumptions could help reduce inequalities.

The "placebo" response in osteoarthritis and its implications for clinical practice.

Many observations support a major biological effect from the way in which people interpret the meaning of each component of their medical experience and the context in which this occurs. A recent systematic review of randomised controlled trials in osteoarthritis has demonstrated that the effect size of "placebo" is substantial and is usually greater than that obtained from the specific effect of an individual treatment. In the context of a randomised controlled trial, such a large placebo or "meaning" response is considered a nuisance, but in the context of clinical practice the optimisation of such meaning and contextual responses, through enhanced "care", could greatly benefit people who suffer from osteoarthritis.