Longer-term quality of care, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of implementing a model of care for osteoarthritis: A cluster-randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of care, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness over 12 months after implementing a structured model of care for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) in primary healthcare as compared to usual care. DESIGN: In this pragmatic cluster-randomized, controlled trial with a stepped-wedge cohort design, we recruited 40 general practitioners (GPs), 37 physiotherapists (PTs), and 393 patients with symptomatic hip or knee OA from six municipalities (clusters) in Norway. The model included the delivery of a 3-hour patient education and 8-12 weeks individually tailored exercise programs, and interactive workshops for GPs and PTs. At 12 months, the patient-reported quality of care was assessed by the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire (16 items, pass rate 0-100%, 100%=best). Costs were obtained from patient-reported and national register data. Cost-effectiveness at the healthcare perspective was evaluated using incremental net monetary benefit (INMB). RESULTS: Of 393 patients, 109 were recruited during the control periods (control group) and 284 were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). At 12 months the intervention group reported statistically significant higher quality of care compared to the control group (59% vs. 40%; mean difference: 17.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.1, 24.0)). Cost-effectiveness analyses showed that the model of care resulted in quality-adjusted life-years gained and cost-savings compared to usual care with mean INMB €2020 (95% CI 611, 3492) over 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that implementing the model of care for OA in primary healthcare, improved quality of care and showed cost-effectiveness over 12 months compared to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02333656.

Musculoskeletal pain patterns and association between dizziness symptoms and pain in patients with long term dizziness - a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of long-term dizziness is considerable both on the personal level and in society and may lead to self-imposed restrictions in daily activities and social relations due to fear of triggering the symptoms. Musculoskeletal complaints seem to be common in persons with dizziness, but studies addressing these complaints as a widespread occurrence, are scarce. This study aimed to examine the occurrence of widespread pain in patients with long-term dizziness and investigate the associations between pain and dizziness symptoms. Further, to explore whether diagnostic belonging is related to the occurrence of pain. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in an otorhinolaryngology clinic and included 150 patients with persistent dizziness. The patients were categorized into three groups: episodic vestibular syndromes, chronic vestibular syndromes, and non-vestibular group. The patients completed questionnaires on dizziness symptoms, catastrophic thinking, and musculoskeletal pain when entering the study. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the population, and associations between pain and dizziness were investigated by linear regression. RESULTS: Pain was reported by 94.5% of the patients. A significantly higher prevalence of pain was reported in all the ten pain sites examined compared to the general population. Number of pain sites and pain intensity were associated with the dizziness severity. Number of pain sites was also associated with dizziness-related handicap, but not with catastrophic thinking. There was no association between pain intensity and dizziness-related handicap or catastrophic thinking. Pain was equally distributed in the diagnostic groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with long-term dizziness have a considerably higher prevalence of pain and number of pain sites than the general population. Pain co-exists with dizziness and is associated with dizziness severity. These findings may indicate that pain should be systematically assessed and treated in patients with persisting dizziness.

Distribution and prevalence of musculoskeletal pain co-occurring with persistent low back pain: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Co-occurring musculoskeletal pain is common among people with persistent low back pain (LBP) and associated with more negative consequences than LBP alone. The distribution and prevalence of musculoskeletal pain co-occurring with persistent LBP has not been systematically described, which hence was the aim of this review. METHODS: Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Scopus. We considered observational studies from clinical settings or based on cohorts of the general or working populations involving adults 18 years or older with persistent LBP (≥4 wks) and co-occurring musculoskeletal pain for eligibility. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were carried out by independent reviewers. Results are presented according to study population, distribution and location(s) of co-occurring pain. RESULTS: Nineteen studies out of 5744 unique records met the inclusion criteria. Studies were from high-income countries in Europe, USA and Japan. A total of 34,492 people with persistent LBP were included in our evidence synthesis. Methods for assessing and categorizing co-occurring pain varied considerably between studies, but based on the available data from observational studies, we identified three main categories of co-occurring pain - these were axial pain (18 to 58%), extremity pain (6 to 50%), and multi-site musculoskeletal pain (10 to 89%). Persistent LBP with co-occurring pain was reported more often by females than males, and co-occurring pain was reported more often in patients with more disability. CONCLUSIONS: People with persistent LBP often report co-occurring neck pain, extremity pain or multi-site pain. Assessment of co-occurring pain alongside persistent LBP vary considerable between studies and there is a need for harmonisation of measurement methods to advance our understanding of how pain in different body regions occur alongside persistent LBP. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017068807 .

Patients in general practice share a common pattern of symptoms that is partly independent of the diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe self-reported symptoms among patients in general practice and to explore the relationships between symptoms experienced by patients and diagnoses given by general practitioners. DESIGN: Doctor-patient questionnaires focusing on patients' self-reported symptoms during the past 7 days and the doctors' diagnoses. SETTING: General practices in urban and suburban areas in Southeast Norway. SUBJECTS: Forty-seven general practitioners who included 866 patients aged ≥18 years on a random day in practice. RESULTS: The most frequently reported symptoms were tiredness (46%), lower back pain (43%), neck pain (41%), headache (39%), shoulder pain (36%), and sleep problems (35%). Women had a significantly higher prevalence than men for 16 of 38 symptoms (p < 0.05). The mean number of symptoms was 7.5 (range, 0-32; women, 8.1; men, 6.5, p < 0.05). Regression analysis showed that patients who received a social security grant had 59% more symptoms than those who were employed and that people with asthenia and depression/anxiety had 44% and 23% more symptoms, respectively than those with all other diagnoses. The patterns of symptoms reported showed similar patterns across the five most prevalent diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in general practice report a number of symptoms and share a common pattern of symptoms, which appear to be partly independent of the diagnoses given. These findings suggest that symptoms are not necessarily an indication of disease.KEY POINTSPatients consulting general practitioners have a high number of self-reported symptoms.The most frequent symptoms are tiredness, lower back pain, neck pain, headache, shoulder pain, and sleep problems.Patients diagnosed with asthenia and depression/anxiety report the highest number of symptoms.Selected diagnoses show similar patterns in symptom distribution.Symptoms are not necessarily an indication of disease.

Low adherence to exercise may have influenced the proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders in an integrated osteoarthritis care model: secondary analyses from a cluster-randomised stepped-wedge trial.

BACKGROUND: To address the well-documented gap between hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment recommendations and current clinical practice, a structured model for integrated OA care was developed and evaluated in a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial. The current study used secondary outcomes to evaluate clinically important response to treatment through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials clinical responder criteria (OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria) after 3 and 6 months between patients receiving the structured OA care model vs. usual care. Secondly, the study aimed to investigate if the proportion of responders in the intervention group was influenced by adherence to the exercise program inherent in the model. METHODS: The study was conducted in primary healthcare in six Norwegian municipalities. General practitioners and physiotherapists received training in OA treatment recommendations and use of the structured model. The intervention group attended a physiotherapist-led OA education program and performed individually tailored exercises for 8-12 weeks. The control group received usual care. Patient-reported pain, function and global assessment of disease activity during the last week were evaluated using 11-point numeric rating scales (NRS 0-10). These scores were used to calculate the proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders. Two-level mixed logistic regression models were fitted to investigate differences in responders between the intervention and control group. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-four intervention and 109 control group participants with hip and knee OA recruited from primary care in six Norwegian municipalities. In total 47% of the intervention and 35% of the control group participants were responders at 3 or 6 months combined; showing an uncertain between-group difference (ORadjusted 1.38 (95% CI 0.41, 4.67). In the intervention group, 184 participants completed the exercise programme (exercised ≥2 times/week for ≥8 weeks) and 55% of these were classified as responders. In contrast, 28% of the 86 non-completers were classified as responders. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders at 3 and 6 months between the intervention and control group was uncertain. In the intervention group, a larger proportion of responders were seen among the exercise completers compared to the non-completers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02333656. Registered 7. January 2015.

Patient injuries reported to the Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation 2011­17. / Pasientskader hos fastleger meldt til Norsk pasientskadeerstatning 2011­17.

BACKGROUND: The Norwegian System of Patient Injury Compensation (NPE) processes compensation claims from patients who believe that they have sustained injuries during treatment in the health services. The number of cases reported to NPE has tended to increase in recent years. The purpose of this study was to obtain an overview of patient-reported injuries within the regular GP scheme. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We studied all injuries to patients within the regular GP scheme in NPE in the years 2011-17. The cases of injury contained information on age, sex, diagnosis, location of the injury and compensation paid, as well as texts describing the treatment and injury. RESULTS: Out of a total of 33 748 compensation claims submitted to NPE, 3 135 cases originated from the regular GP scheme. Of the group of claimants 53 % were women, and the average age was 44.7 years (standard deviation 17.7 years). Altogether 760 (24 %) of the cases were upheld. Diagnostic error was the reason for 553 (73 %) of the cases being upheld. The groups most frequently represented were 'tumours and cancers' (847 (27 %) of the claims) and 'orthopaedics' (592 (19 %) of the claims). INTERPRETATION: The regular GP scheme accounts for many patient contacts, and a review of patient injuries may make it possible to prevent future failures.

Correction: Implementing a structured model for osteoarthritis care in primary healthcare: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002949.].

Implementing a structured model for osteoarthritis care in primary healthcare: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: To improve quality of care for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), a structured model for integrated OA care was developed based on international recommendations. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of this model in primary care. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial with stepped-wedge cohort design in 6 Norwegian municipalities (clusters) between January 2015 and October 2017. The randomised order was concealed to the clusters until the time of crossover from the control to the intervention phase. The intervention was implementation of the SAMBA model, facilitated by interactive workshops for general practitioners and physiotherapists with an update on OA treatment recommendations. Patients in the intervention group attended a physiotherapist-led OA education and individually tailored exercise programme for 8-12 weeks. The primary outcome was patient-reported quality of care (OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire; 0-100, 100 = optimal quality) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported referrals to physiotherapy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and orthopaedic surgeon consultation; patients' satisfaction with care; physical activity level; and proportion of patients who were overweight or obese (body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2). In all, 40 of 80 general practitioners (mean age [SD] 50 [12] years, 42% females) and 37 of 64 physiotherapists (mean age [SD] 42 [8] years, 65% females) participated. They identified 531 patients, of which 393 patients (mean age [SD] 64 [10] years, 71% females) with symptomatic hip or knee OA were included. Among these, 109 patients were recruited during the control periods (control group), and 284 patients were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). The patients in the intervention group reported significantly higher quality of care (score of 60 versus 41, mean difference 18.9; 95% CI 12.7, 25.1; p < 0.001) and higher satisfaction with OA care (odds ratio [OR] 12.1; 95% CI 6.44, 22.72; p < 0.001) compared to patients in the control group. The increase in quality of care was close to, but below, the pre-specified minimal important change. In the intervention group, a higher proportion was referred to physiotherapy (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.08, 5.73; p = 0.03), a higher proportion fulfilled physical activity recommendations (OR 9.3; 95% CI 2.87, 30.37; p < 0.001), and a lower proportion was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.08, 0.80; p = 0.02), as compared to the control group. There were no significant group differences regarding referral to MRI (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.13, 2.38; p = 0.42) and proportion of patients who were overweight or obese (OR 1.3; 95% CI 0.70, 2.51; p = 0.34). Study limitations include the imbalance in patient group size, which may have been due to an increased attention to OA patients among the health professionals during the intervention phase, and a potential recruitment bias as the patient participants were identified by their health professionals. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a structured model in primary care resulted in higher quality of OA care as compared to usual care. Future studies should explore ways to implement the structured model for integrated OA care on a larger scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02333656.

Predictors for outcome in acute lateral epicondylitis.

BACKGROUND: Lateral epicondylitis or tennis elbow is a frequent condition with long-lasting symptoms. In order to identify predictors for treatment success and pain in lateral epicondylitis, we used data from a randomized controlled trial. This trial investigated the efficacy of physiotherapy alone or combined with corticosteroid injection for acute lateral epicondylitis in general practice. METHODS: The outcomes treatment success and pain score on VAS were assessed at 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks. We ran a univariate binary logistic regression with generalized estimating equations (GEE) and subsequently an adjusted multilevel logistic regression to analyze the association between potential prognostic indicators and the outcome success/ no success. To assess the changes in pain score we used a two-level multilevel linear regression (MLR) followed by an adjusted MLR model with random effects. RESULTS: The most consistent predictor for reduced treatment success at all time points was a high Pain Free Function Index score signifying more pain on everyday activities. Being on paid sick-leave and having a recurring complaint increased short term treatment success but gave decreased long-term treatment success. The patients reporting symptoms after engaging in probable overuse in an unusual activity, tended towards increased treatment success at all time-points, but significant only at 12 weeks. The most consistent predictor of increased pain at all time points was a higher overall complaints score at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that in treating acute lateral epicondylitis, a consideration of baseline pain, a registration of the patient's overall complaint on a VAS scale and an assessment of the patient's perceived performance in everyday activities with the Pain Free Function Index can be useful in identifying patients that will have a more protracted and serious condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00826462 . Date of registration January 22, 2009. The Trial was prospectively registrated.

Acting by persuasion- values and rhetoric in medical certificates of work incapacity: A qualitative document analysis.

When the patient applies for disability benefit in Norway, the general practitioner (GP) is required by the National Insurance Administration (NAV) to confirm that the patient is unfit for work due to disease. Considering the important social role of medical certificates, they have been given surprisingly little attention by the medical critique. They may make essential differences to peoples' lives, legitimise large social costs and, in addition, the GPs report that issuing certificates can be problematic. This article explores values, attitudes and persuasive language in a selection of medical certificates written by GPs. We direct attention to such texts as significant social actors using a mixed rhetoric including certain values and attitudes. When arguing for granting the patient disability benefit, some GPs emphasised the 'worthiness' of the patient by pointing to positive attitudes approved by the national insurance: a will to work and participate, to cooperate and be motivated. Others pointed out the patient's positive character in terms of universally accepted values, called for the reader's (the NAV official) sympathy , understanding and helpfulness or appealed to his/her willingness to be realistic and pragmatic and grant disability benefit (DB). The dialogic style varied: some certifiers-although they argued for disability benefit-showed openness to possible opposing or alternative voices by displaying their own uncertainty. Others addressed the reader to share responsibility, demanding or urging for DB. This shifting rhetoric, we believe, mirrors that the GPs see themselves as the patient's advocate, and that they may find themselves conflicted. We propose further studies within qualitative research to investigate the effect of this rhetoric on the reader, the decision-makers. In addition, to improve the quality and accuracy of these important documents, we suggest that medical schools introduce students to the making of text as a specific skill of medical practice.

'Working is out of the question': a qualitative text analysis of medical certificates of disability.

BACKGROUND: Medical certificates influence the distribution of economic benefits in welfare states; however, the qualitative aspects of these texts remain largely unexplored. The present study is the first systematic investigation done of these texts. Our aim was to investigate how GPs select and mediate information about their patients' health and how they support their conclusions about illness, functioning and fitness for work in medical certificates. METHODS: We performed a textual analysis of thirty-three medical certificates produced by general practitioners (GP) in Norway at the request of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (NAV).The certificates were subjected to critical reading using the combined analytic methods of narratology and linguistics. RESULTS: Some of the medical information was unclear, ambiguous, and possibly misleading. Evaluations of functioning related to illness were scarce or absent, regardless of diagnosis, and, hence, the basis of working incapacity was unclear. Voices in the text frequently conflated, obscuring the source of speaker. In some documents, the expert's subtle use of language implied doubts about the claimant's credibility, but explicit advocacy also occurred. GPs show little insight into their patients' working lives, but rather than express uncertainty and incompetence, they may resort to making too absolute and too general statements about patients' working capacity, and fail to report thorough assessments. CONCLUSIONS: A number of the texts in our material may not function as sufficient or reliable sources for making decisions regarding social benefits. Certificates as these may be deficient for several reasons, and textual incompetence may be one of them. Physicians in Norway receive no systematic training in professional writing. High-quality medical certificates, we believe, might be economical in the long term: it might increase the efficiency with which NAV processes cases and save costs by eliminating the need for unnecessary and expensive specialist reports. Moreover, correct and coherent medical certificates can strengthen legal protection for claimants. Eventually, reducing advocacy in these documents may contribute to a fairer evaluation of whether claimants are eligible for disability benefits or not. Therefore, we believe that professional writing skills should be validated as an important part of medical practice and should be integrated in medical schools and in further education as a discipline in its own right, preferably involving humanities professors.

Reasons for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic versus a regular general practitioner - a survey among immigrant and native walk-in patients in Oslo, Norway.

OBJECTIVE: To explore reasons for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic versus a regular general practitioner (RGP). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study using a multilingual anonymous questionnaire. SETTING: Native and immigrant walk-in patients attending a general emergency outpatient clinic in Oslo (Monday-Friday, 08:00-23:00) during 2 weeks in September 2009. SUBJECTS: We included 1022 walk-in patients: 565 native Norwegians (55%) and 457 immigrants (45%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' reasons for attending an emergency outpatient clinic versus their RGP. RESULTS: Among patients reporting an RGP affiliation, 49% tried to contact their RGP before this emergency encounter: 44% of native Norwegian and 58% of immigrant respondents. Immigrants from Africa [odds ratio (OR) = 2.55 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.46-4.46)] and Asia [OR = 2.32 (95% CI: 1.42-3.78)] were more likely to contact their RGP before attending the general emergency outpatient clinic compared with native Norwegians. The most frequent reason for attending the emergency clinic was difficulty making an immediate appointment with their RGP. A frequent reason for not contacting an RGP was lack of access: 21% of the native Norwegians versus 4% of the immigrants claimed their RGP was in another district/municipality, and 31% of the immigrants reported a lack of affiliation with the RGP scheme. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Access to primary care provided by an RGP affects patients' use of emergency health care services. To facilitate continuity of health care, policymakers should emphasize initiatives to improve access to primary health care services. KEY POINTS Access to immediate primary health care provided by a regular general practitioner (RGP) can reduce patients' use of emergency health care services. The main reason for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic was difficulty obtaining an immediate appointment with an RGP. A frequent reason for native Norwegians attending a general emergency outpatient clinic during the daytime is having an RGP outside Oslo. Lack of affiliation with the RGP scheme is a frequent reason for attending a general emergency outpatient clinic among immigrants.

Writing the patient down and out: the construal of the patient in medical certificates of disability.

We analysed a set of medical certificates to investigate how GPs portray patients who seek disability benefits in Norway, focusing on patient centredness, agency and involvement. We performed a qualitative linguistic analysis of 33 medical certificates collected throughout Norway that were strategically selected based on the patients' sex, age and diagnosis. We found that patients were represented as passive carriers of symptoms, in whom agency was low, failed, conditional or non-existing, or as passive objects of the actions of impersonalised others. Conversely, symptoms were foregrounded as independent and powerful actors. The patient's experience of illness was sometimes reported, but the perspective of the GP tended to be doctor oriented, rather than patient centred. The policy of the social services, which emphasises patient involvement, patient centredness and work, rather than social benefits, was almost completely absent from these medical certificates. If medical certificates are to be a valid basis for decisions within the social services, we suggest that doctor paternalism in these documents must give way to considering the patient as an involved and co-responsible individual in the processes of disability assessment.

Is it a matter of urgency? A survey of assessments by walk-in patients and doctors of the urgency level of their encounters at a general emergency outpatient clinic in Oslo, Norway.

BACKGROUND: Emergency room (ER) use is increasing in several countries. Variability in the proportion of non-urgent ER visits was found to range from 5 to 90 % (median 32 %). Non-urgent emergency visits are considered an inappropriate and inefficient use of the health-care system because they may lead to higher expenses, crowding, treatment delays, and loss of continuity of health care provided by a general practitioner. Urgency levels of doctor-walk-in patient encounters were assessed based on their region of origin in a diverse Norwegian population. METHODS: An anonymous, multilingual questionnaire was distributed to all walk-in patients at a general emergency outpatient clinic in Oslo during two weeks in September 2009. We analysed demographic data, patient-doctor assessments of the level of urgency, and the results of the consultation. We used descriptive statistics to obtain frequencies with 95 % confidence interval (CI) for assessed levels of urgency and outcomes. Concordance between the patients' and doctors' assessments was analysed using a Kendall tau-b test. We used binary logistic regression modelling to quantify associations of explanatory variables and outcomes according to urgency level assessments. RESULTS: The analysis included 1821 walk-in patients. Twenty-four per cent of the patients considered their emergency consultation to be non-urgent, while the doctors considered 64 % of encounters to be non-urgent. The concordance between the assessments by the patient and by their doctor was positive but low, with a Kendall tau-b coefficient of 0.202 (p < 0.001). Adjusted logistic regression analysis showed that patients from Eastern Europe (odds ratio (OR) = 3.04; 95 % CI 1.60-5.78), Asia and Turkey (OR = 4.08; 95 % CI 2.43-6.84), and Africa (OR = 8.47; 95 % CI 3.87-18.5) reported significantly higher urgency levels compared with Norwegians. The doctors reported no significant difference in assessment of urgency based on the patient's region of origin, except for Africans (OR = 0.64; 95 % CI 0.43-0.96). CONCLUSION: This study reveals discrepancies between assessments by walk-in patients and doctors of the urgency level of their encounters at a general emergency clinic. The patients' self-assessed perception of the urgency level was related to their region of origin.

Use of emergency care services by immigrants­a survey of walk-in patients who attended the Oslo Accident and Emergency Outpatient Clinic.

BACKGROUND: The Oslo Accident and Emergency Outpatient Clinic (OAEOC) experienced a 5-6% annual increase in patient visits between 2005 and 2011, which was significantly higher than the 2-3% annual increase among registered Oslo residents. This study explored immigrant walk-in patients' use of both the general emergency and trauma clinics of the OAEOC and their concomitant use of regular general practitioners (RGPs) in Oslo. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of walk-in patients attending the OAEOC during 2 weeks in September 2009. We analysed demographic data, patients' self-reported affiliation with the RGP scheme, self-reported number of OAEOC and RGP consultations during the preceding 12 months. The first approach used Poisson regression models to study visit frequency. The second approach compared the proportions of first- and second-generation immigrants and those from the four most frequently represented countries (Sweden, Pakistan, Somalia and Poland) among the patient population, with their respective proportions within the general Oslo population. RESULTS: The analysis included 3864 patients: 1821 attended the Department of Emergency General Practice ("general emergency clinic"); 2043 attended the Section for Orthopaedic Emergency ("trauma clinic"). Both first- and second-generation immigrants reported a significantly higher OAEOC visit frequency compared with Norwegians. Norwegians, representing 73% of the city population accounted for 65% of OAEOC visits. In contrast, first- and second-generation immigrants made up 27% of the city population but accounted for 35% of OAEOC visits. This proportional increase in use was primarily observed in the general emergency clinic (42% of visits). Their proportional use of the trauma clinic (29%) was similar to their proportion in the city. Among first-generation immigrants only 71% were affiliated with the RGP system, in contrast to 96% of Norwegians. Similar finding were obtained when immigrants were grouped by nationality. Compared to Norwegians, immigrants from Sweden, Pakistan and Somalia reported using the OAEOC significantly more often. Immigrants from Sweden, Poland and Somalia were over-represented at both clinics. The least frequent RGP affiliation was among immigrants from Sweden (32%) and Poland (65%). CONCLUSIONS: In Norway, immigrant subgroups use emergency health care services in different ways. Understanding these patterns of health-seeking behaviour may be important when designing emergency health services.

Medically unexplained conditions considered by patients in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Patients frequently present with multiple and 'unexplained' symptoms, often resulting in complex consultations. To better understand these patients is a challenge to health care professionals, in general, and GPs, in particular. OBJECTIVES: In our research on symptom reporting, we wanted to explore whether patients consider that they may suffer from conditions commonly regarded as unexplained, and we explored associations between these concerns and symptom load, life stressors and socio-demographic factors. METHODS: Consecutive, unselected patients in general practice completed questionnaires addressing eight conditions commonly regarded as unexplained (amalgam poisoning, Candida syndrome, fibromyalgia, food intolerance, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, burnout syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome and irritable bowel syndrome). With logistic regression, we analysed associations with symptom load, burden of life stressors with negative impact on present health and socio-demographic variables. RESULTS: Out of the 909 respondents (response rate = 88.8%), 863 had complete data. In total, 39.6% of patients had considered that they may suffer from one or more unexplained conditions (UCs). These concerns were strongly and positively associated with recent symptom load and number of life stressors. If we excluded burnout and food intolerance, corresponding associations were found. CONCLUSION: Patients frequently considered that they may suffer from UCs. The likelihood of such concerns strongly increased with an increasing symptom load and with the number of life stressors with negative impact on present health. Hence, the number of symptoms may be a strong indicator of whether patients consider their symptoms part of such often controversial multisymptom conditions.

Shoulder diagnoses in secondary care, a one year cohort.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is common in the general population. Reports on specific diagnoses in general populations are scarce and only from primary care. The diagnostic distribution of shoulder disorders in secondary care is not reported. Most of the clinical research in the shoulder field is done in hospital settings. The aim of this study was to identify the diagnoses in a 1-year cohort in a hospital-based outpatient clinic using standardized diagnostic criteria and to compare the results with previous studies. METHODS: A diagnostic routine was conducted among patients referred to our physical medicine outpatient clinic at Oslo University Hospital. Diagnostic criteria were derived from the literature and supplemented with research criteria. RESULTS: Of 766 patients diagnosed, 55% were women and the mean age was 49 years (range 19-93, SD ± 14). The most common diagnoses were subacromial pain (36%), myalgia (17%) and adhesive capsulitis (11%). Subacromial pain and adhesive capsulitis were most frequent in persons aged 40-60 years. Shoulder myalgia was most frequent in age groups under 40. Labral tears and instability problems (8%) were most frequent in young patients and not present after age 50. Full-thickness rotator cuff tears (8%) and glenohumeral osteoarthritis (4%) were more prevalent after the age of 60. Few differences were observed between sexes. We identified three studies reporting shoulder diagnoses in primary care. CONCLUSION: Subacromial pain syndrome, myalgia and adhesive capsulitis were the most prevalent diagnoses in our study. However, large differences in prevalence between different studies were found, most likely arising from different use of diagnostic criteria and a difference in populations between primary and secondary care. Of the diagnoses in our cohort, 20% were not reported by the studies from primary care (glenohumeral osteoarthritis, full thickness rotator cuff tears, labral tears and instabilities).

The validity of self-reported body mass index in a population-based osteoarthritis study.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a well-known risk factor for osteoarthritis (OA). The majority of obesity research in OA is performed using self-reported BMI-data, however, its validity in persons with OA is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the validity of self-reported body mass index (BMI) in persons with and without clinical osteoarthritis (OA) in a population-based survey. METHODS: Height and weight were self-reported, and thereafter measured in 600 persons with and without clinical OA according to the American College of Rheumatology-criteria (knees, hips and/or hands). We compared the differences between measured and self-reported heights, weights and BMIs (kg/m2) for the two groups and explored whether demographic/clinical factors were associated with inaccurate reporting in the OA patients using multivariate linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Mean (SD) age was 64 (8.7) years and 412 (69%) were women. Participants with clinical OA (n = 449) underreported their BMI to a greater extent than participants without clinical OA (n = 151) [mean (SD) difference 1.34 (1.68) kg/m2 and 0.78 (1.40) kg/m2 (p = 0.000), respectively]. There was a strong dose-dependent association between higher measured BMI and greater underreporting of BMI in multivariate analyses (BMI 25-29.99 kg/m2: B = 0.40, 95% CI, 0.06, 0.77), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2: B = 1.30, 95% CI, 0.86, 1.75) in the clinical OA patients. A higher age as well as the time interval from self-reported to measured BMI-data were associated with inaccurate reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Researchers using self-reported height and weight data should be aware of limited agreement with actual height and weight in overweight and obese individuals with clinical OA.