Content Validition and Psychometric Evaluation of the Self-efficacy and Performance in Self-management Support Instrument for Physiotherapists.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and psychometrically test the Self-Efficacy and Performance in Self-Management Support instrument for physiotherapists (SEPSS-PT), based on the SEPSS-36, the corresponding instrument for nurses. DESIGN: Instrument development including content validation and psychometric evaluation (construct validity, factor structure, and reliability). SETTING: Data were collected from literature, expertmeetings, and online questionnaire PARTICIPANTS: Next to a comprehensive literature study, experts (self-management experts (n=2); physiotherapists (n=10); patients (n=6)) and physiotherapists and physiotherapy students (n=334), participated in different stages of the study. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Not applicable. A literature study (n=42 reviews) and consultations with physiotherapists and patients identified the specific content for physiotherapy. The Five-A's model and overarching competencies of "supportive partnership attitude", were used to structure the items. Psychometric evaluation of the draft questionnaire (40 items) was tested in a sample of 334 physiotherapists and physiotherapy students from the Netherlands, of whom 33 filled out the questionnaire twice to establish the test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analyses revealed satisfactory fit indices for both the 6-factor model and hierarchical model, with best fit for the 6-factor model. The questionnaire discriminated between physiotherapists and physiotherapy students, and between physiotherapists who did or did not consider self-management support important. The overall internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) was high, both for the self-efficacy and the performance items. In most of the subscales, test-retest intra-class correlation coefficients for both overall self-efficacy and performance were good, but in 3 subscales insufficient for performance. CONCLUSION: The SEPSS-PT questionnaire is a 40-item, Likert-scaled instrument with good content and construct validity, good internal consistency and reliability, and sufficient test-retest reliability. Future research in a larger and more diverse sample could confirm stability and discriminating power.

Factors associated with meniscus volume in knees free of degenerative features.

OBJECTIVES: To explore factors that were associated with meniscus volume in knees free of radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) features and symptoms of OA. METHODS: In the third Rotterdam Study cohort, clinical, radiographic, and magnetic resonance data were obtained at baseline (BL) and after 5 years of follow-up. Meniscus volumes and their change over time were calculated after semi-automatic segmentation on Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Knees with radiographic OA features (Kellgren and Lawrence>0) or clinical diagnosis of OA (American College of Rheumatology) at BL were excluded. Ten OA risk factors were adjusted in the multivariable analysis (generalized estimating equations), treating two knees within subjects as repeated measurements. RESULTS: From 1065 knees (570 subjects), the average (standard deviation) age and Body mass index (BMI) of included subjects were 54.3 (3.7) years and 26.5 (4.4) kg/m2. At BL, nine factors (varus alignment, higher BMI, meniscus pathologies, meniscus extrusion, cartilage lesions, injury, greater physical activity level, quadriceps muscle strength, and higher age) were significantly associated with greater meniscus volume. Five factors (injury, meniscus pathologies, meniscus extrusion, higher age, and change of BMI) were significantly associated with meniscus volume loss. CONCLUSIONS: Modifiable factors (varus alignment, BMI, physical activity level, and quadriceps muscle strength) and non-modifiable factors (higher age, injury, meniscus pathologies, meniscus extrusion, and cartilage lesions) were all associated with meniscus volume or meniscus volume loss over time.

A systematic review of the sex differences in risk factors for knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Previous systematic reviews focused on the evidence of common risk factors for knee OA (KOA); however, the effect and strength of association between risk factors and KOA might be different between the two sexes. The aim of the present systematic review was to determine the current evidence on sex differences in the association between risk factors and KOA and their prevalence. METHODS: We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Web of Science. A methodological quality assessment was conducted independently by two researchers according to an adapted version of the standardized set of criteria known as the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). The NOS, a star system, was converted to three categories of quality. RESULTS: In total, 27 studies reported sex-specific risk estimates on several risk factors for KOA. Out of the 22 longitudinal cohort studies (except one nested case-control), 12 were of good quality and 10 were of fair quality. The five cross-sectional studies consisted of one of good, three of fair and one of poor quality. There was an indication of sex differences in risk factors leading to higher risk of KOA: high BMI, alcohol consumption, atherosclerosis and high vitamin E levels in women, and high physical activity, soft drink consumption and abdominal obesity in men. Knee injury, high blood pressure and low step rate seem to affect both women and men. CONCLUSION: More good quality studies are needed to assess sex differences in risk factors for KOA, especially for symptomatic/clinical OA.

Plasma proteomics identifies CRTAC1 as a biomarker for osteoarthritis severity and progression.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify biomarkers for radiographic OA severity and progression acting within the inflammation and metabolic pathways. METHODS: For 3517 Rotterdam Study participants, 184 plasma protein levels were measured using Olink inflammation and cardiometabolic panels. We studied associations with severity and progression of knee, hip and hand OA and a composite overall OA burden score by multivariable regression models, adjusting for age, sex, cell counts and BMI. RESULTS: We found 18 significantly associated proteins for overall OA burden, of which 5 stayed significant after multiple testing correction: circulating cartilage acidic protein 1 (CRTAC1), cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP), thrombospondin 4, IL-18 receptor 1 (IL-18R1) and TNF ligand superfamily member 14. These proteins were also associated with progression of knee OA, with the exception of IL-18R1. The strongest association was found for the level of CRTAC1, with 1 s.d. increase in protein level resulting in an increase of 0.09 (95% CI 0.06, 0.12) in the overall OA Kellgren-Lawrence sum score (P = 2.9 × 10-8) in the model adjusted for age, sex, BMI and cell counts. This association was also present with the severity of OA in all three joints and progression of knee OA and was independent of BMI. We observed a stronger association for CRTAC1 with OA than for the well-known OA biomarker COMP. CONCLUSION: We identified several compelling biomarkers reflecting the overall OA burden and the increased risk for OA progression. CRTAC1 was the most compelling and robust biomarker for OA severity and progression. Such a biomarker may be used for disease monitoring.

Nocturnal pain, is the pain different compared with pain during the day? An exploratory cross-sectional study in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore characteristics of nocturnal pain and to identify differences in participants' characteristics and osteoarthritis (OA) symptoms between hip and knee OA participants with and without nocturnal pain. METHODS: Data for this exploratory cross-sectional study were obtained from an online survey, distributed through social media and patient associations in the period from April 2020 until May 2020, which was conducted in 101 participants with (self-reported) hip or knee OA. Descriptive statistics were used to provide insight into the characteristics of the study population. Pain intensity, localization, dimension, and impact of (nocturnal) pain on sleep were described and compared with daytime pain. RESULTS: Nocturnal pain was reported by 76/101 (75%) participants. Participants with nocturnal pain scored higher visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for their nocturnal pain compared with their pain at the moment (respectively: median VAS score 49.5 vs. 40.0). Their day pain rating indexes of sensory-discriminative dimension were higher compared with their nocturnal pain. Comparison between participants with and without nocturnal pain showed that participants with nocturnal pain were affected by intermittent, constant, and radiating pain. Pain had more impact on their sleep and they scored their pain at its worst higher compared with participants without nocturnal pain. CONCLUSION: In participants with nocturnal pain (75%), we found that their VAS pain scores were not in harmony with their pain expressed in words. This study increases awareness of nocturnal pain in OA patients in general practice. More research is needed to provide general practitioners possible interventions for patients with OA and nocturnal pain.

Nocturnal pain is an important part of the pain experience in osteoarthritis (OA) and highlighted as key concern by patients with hip and knee OA. Reports have shown a wide range in prevalence of nocturnal hip and knee pain in OA patients (14%­85%). We found that participants with nocturnal pain (76/101 = 75%) were more often affected by both intermittent and constant pain, reported higher pain scores for pain at its worst and pain had more impact on their sleep compared with those without nocturnal pain. Participants with nocturnal pain scored higher visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for their nocturnal pain compared with their pain at the moment. On the other hand, they scored the pain expressed in words higher for their day pain than for their nocturnal pain. More research is needed to explore factors that associate with nocturnal pain and to explore how healthcare professionals can support people with nocturnal pain.

Towards sex-specific osteoarthritis risk models: evaluation of risk factors for knee osteoarthritis in males and females.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify sex-specific prevalence and strength of risk factors for the incidence of radiographic knee OA (incRKOA). METHODS: Our study population consisted of 10 958 Rotterdam Study participants free of knee OA in one or both knees at baseline. One thousand and sixty-four participants developed RKOA after a median follow-up time of 9.6 years. We estimated the association between each available risk factor and incRKOA using sex stratified multivariate regression models with generalized estimating equations. Subsequently, we statistically tested sex differences between risk estimates and calculated the population attributable fractions (PAFs) for modifiable risk factors. RESULTS: The prevalence of the investigated risk factors was, in general, higher in women compared with men, except that alcohol intake and smoking were higher in men and high BMI showed equal prevalence. We found significantly different risk estimates between men and women: high level of physical activity [relative risk (RR) 1.76 (95% CI: 1.29-2.40)] or a Kellgren and Lawrence score 1 at baseline [RR 5.48 (95% CI: 4.51-6.65)] was higher in men. Among borderline significantly different risk estimates was BMI ≥27, associated with higher risk for incRKOA in women [RR 2.00 (95% CI: 1.74-2.31)]. The PAF for higher BMI was 25.6% in women and 19.3% in men. CONCLUSION: We found sex-specific differences in both presence and relative risk of several risk factors for incRKOA. Especially BMI, a modifiable risk factor, impacts women more strongly than men. These risk factors can be used in the development of personalized prevention strategies and in building sex-specific prediction tools to identify high risk profile patients.

The use and safety of corticosteroid injections for shoulder pain in general practice: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for shoulder pain in general practice recommend treatment with corticosteroid injections (CSI) if initial pain management fails. However, little is known about the actual use and safety of CSIs in treatment by general practitioners (GP). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to gain insight into the use and safety of CSIs for patients with a new episode of shoulder pain in general practice. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a healthcare database containing the electronic medical records of approximately 200,000 patients in general practice. A search algorithm was constructed to identify patients with a new episode of shoulder pain between January 2012 and December 2017. Data on the use of CSIs in 2 random samples (n = 1,000) were manually validated for a 12-month period after the diagnosis. RESULTS: In total, 26% of the patients with a new episode of shoulder pain received a CSI. The patient's age (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.04) and a history of shoulder pain (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.13-2.12) were significantly associated with the administration of a CSI. Half of the patients received the CSI in the first consultation. The patient's age was positively associated with the likelihood of receiving the CSI in the first consultation (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02). No serious adverse reactions were recorded by the GP. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the guidelines, CSIs were frequently administered in the first consultation. Older patients and patients with a history of shoulder pain were more likely to receive a CSI for shoulder pain.

Course of pain and fluctuations in pain related to suspected early hip osteoarthritis: the CHECK study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence during a 10-year follow-up of clinically relevant fluctuations in pain and the course of hip pain in participants with hip complaints suspected to be early stage hip osteoarthritis (OA). To distinguish between participants with relevant fluctuations in pain and those without based on baseline characteristics. METHODS: Data were collected at baseline and after 2, 5, 8, and 10 years on 495 participants from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee Study (CHECK) with hip pain at baseline. Baseline demographic, anamnestic, and physical-examination characteristics were assessed. The primary outcome was levels of pain in the past week (scored using 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale) at follow-up assessments. Relevant fluctuation was defined as average absolute residuals greater than 1 after fitting a straight line to the participant's pain scores over time. RESULTS: The majority of the participants (76%) had stable or decreasing pain. Relevant fluctuations were found in 37% of the participants. The following baseline variables were positively associated with the presence of relevant fluctuations: higher levels of pain in the past week, use of pain transformation as a coping style, higher number of comorbidities, use of pain medication, and higher levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. No associations were found for baseline radiographic hip OA or clinical hip OA. CONCLUSION: During a 10-year follow-up, the majority of participants had stable or decreasing pain levels. In those participants with relevant fluctuation (37%), a limited number of baseline variables were associated with increased odds of having relevant fluctuations in pain.

Pain appears to be an important reason for consulting the general practitioner (GP) for hip osteoarthritis (OA) complaints. We know that hip pain remained quite stable over 10 years. Also is known that there is considerable variety between patients in pain. In this study, we found relevant pain fluctuations in 37% of primary care patients with hip complaints over a period of 10 years. The pain fluctuation was not associated with having osteoarthritis, neither radiographic hip OA (diagnosed based on a X-ray) or clinical hip OA (determined according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria) at baseline. More research is needed to discover why some people experience fluctuations in time than others.

10-Year natural course of early hip osteoarthritis in middle-aged persons with hip pain: a CHECK study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the natural course of hip osteoarthritis (OA) in a population of first-time presenters with hip complaints. METHODS: Data were collected at baseline and after 2, 5, 8 and 10 years on participants from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee study with early symptomatic hip OA. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the natural course of the hip complaints with respect to clinical signs and symptoms, physical functioning and radiographic osteoarthritis (ROA) features. RESULTS: In total, 588 participants were included with hip complaints and 86% completed the 10-year follow-up. The 10-year follow-up showed that 12% (69 participants) underwent hip replacement (HR), an increase of ROA of the hip (Kellgren and Lawrence score≥2) from 19% to 49%, and an increase in clinical hip OA according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria from 27% to 43%. All Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index subscales and physical activity remained on average constant during the 10-year follow-up for those who did not undergo an HR. The use of pain medication increased from 43% at baseline to 50% after 10 years. CONCLUSION: One out of nine participants with early hip problems received an HR during the 10-year follow-up. Prevalence of clinical hip OA and hip ROA increased steadily during the 10-year follow-up. Overall, we observed more hip OA, but fewer or stable complaints with respect to clinical signs and symptoms, and physical functioning. So it could be cautiously concluded that after 10 years, first-time presenters with hip complaints either received an HR or their symptoms remained stable.

Antidepressant and anticonvulsant prescription rates in patients with osteoarthritis: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: There are signs that antidepressants and anticonvulsants are being prescribed more often for OA patients, despite limited evidence. Our objectives were to examine prescription rates and time trends for antidepressants and anticonvulsants in OA patients, to assess the percentage of long-term prescriptions, and to determine patient characteristics associated with antidepressant or anticonvulsant prescription. METHODS: A population-based cohort study was conducted using the Integrated Primary Care Information database. First, episodic and prevalent prescription rates for antidepressants (amitriptyline, nortriptyline and duloxetine) and anticonvulsants (gabapentinoids) in OA patients were calculated for the period 2008-17. Logistic regression was used to assess which patient characteristics were associated with prescriptions. RESULTS: In total, 164 292 OA patients were included. The prescription rates of amitriptyline, gabapentin and pregabalin increased over time. The increase in prescription rates for pregabalin was most pronounced. Episodic prescription rate increased from 7.1 to 13.9 per 1000 person-years between 2008 and 2017. Amitriptyline was prescribed most (15.1 episodic prescriptions per 1000 person-years in 2017). Prescription rates of nortriptyline and duloxetine remained stable at 3.0 and 2.0 episodic prescriptions per 1000 person-years, respectively. For ≤3% of patients with incident OA, medication was prescribed long-term (≥3 months). In general, all medication was prescribed more frequently for older patients (except duloxetine), women, patients with OA in ≥2 joints, patients with spinal OA and patients with musculoskeletal disorders. CONCLUSION: Prescription rates of amitriptyline, gabapentin and pregabalin increased over time. Since there is little evidence to support prescription in OA, caution is necessary when prescribing.