Implementation of a 'Joint Clinic' to resolve unmet need for orthopaedic services in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis: a program evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis, principally affecting the older population. Highly prevalent, disabling diseases such as osteoarthritis strain the capacity of health systems, and can result in unmet need for services. The Joint Clinic was initiated to provide secondary care consultations and access to outpatient services for people with advanced hip or knee osteoarthritis, who were referred by their general practitioner for orthopaedic consultation but not offered an orthopaedic specialist appointment. METHODS: This longitudinal programme evaluation comprised four components: a proof-of-concept evaluation; an implementation evaluation; a process evaluation; and an outcomes evaluation. Interviews and surveys of general practitioners, staff, and patients were conducted pre- and post-implementation. Interviews were transcribed, and thematic analysis was completed. In addition, Joint Clinic patient visits and outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: One hundred and eleven primary care physicians (GPs) and 66 patients were surveyed, and 28 semi-structured interviews of hospital staff and GPs were conducted. Proof of concept was satisfied. Interim and final implementation evaluations indicated adherence to the concept model, high levels of acceptance of and confidence in the programme and its staff, and timely completion within budget. Process evaluation revealed positive impacts of the programme and positive stakeholder perceptions, with some weaknesses in communication to the outer context of primary care. The Joint Clinic saw a total of 637 patient visits during 2 years of operation. Unmet need was reduced by 90%. Patient and referring physician satisfaction was high. Hospital management confirmed that the programme will continue. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation indicates that the Joint Clinic concept model is fit for purpose, functioned well within the organisation, and achieved its primary objective of reducing unmet need of secondary care consultation for those suffering advanced hip or knee osteoarthritis.

Outcomes and Factors Influencing Response to an Individualized Multidisciplinary Chronic Disease Management Program for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of, and factors associated with, response to a chronic disease management program for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Over a 2-year period (2012-2014), 218 patients (97 hip OA; 121 knee OA) were managed with an individualized program of interventions that could include education, physiotherapy, orthotics, occupational therapy, or dietitian referral. Changes in Oxford Hip Score or Oxford Knee Score and Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical and Mental Component Summary Score (PCS, MCS) were analyzed by joint affected, both unadjusted, and gender and age adjusted. A further analysis also adjusted for body mass index. RESULTS: At mean 12-month follow-up, patients with knee OA had a statistically significant improvement in Oxford Knee Score and PCS, while patients with hip OA had a statistically significant deterioration in all 3 scores. There was evidence that these changes differed between joints for Oxford and PCS scores. Older age was associated with worse outcomes for Oxford scores. Higher body mass index was associated with worse outcomes for Oxford and PCS scores. Patients with hip OA (35%) were more likely to deteriorate to a clinically significant extent (5 points) for Oxford scores than those with knee OA. Gender was not associated with outcomes. Patients with hip OA (54%) were more likely than those with knee OA (24%) to have subsequently had surgery (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with knee OA were more likely to improve with a chronic disease management plan than patients with hip OA and efforts should be directed to them.

The Joint Clinic: Managing Excess Demand for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis Referrals Using a New Physiotherapy-Led Outpatient Service.

BACKGROUND: There are increasing problems with access to both outpatient assessment and joint replacement surgery for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Data were collected on all patients seen at the Joint Clinic over a 2-year period with minimum 12-month follow-up. Patients were assessed by a nurse and a physiotherapist, baseline scores and demographic details collected, and an individualized personal care plan developed. Patients could be referred for a first specialist assessment (FSA) if their severity justified surgical assessment. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-eight patients were seen at Joint Clinic, of whom 150 (44%) had hip and 189 (56%) had knee OA. The mean age was 67.4 years and there were 152 men (45%) and 187 women (55%). The mean baseline Oxford score was 19.8 (standard deviation 8.2). Fifty-four patients were referred directly to FSA (mean Oxford score 13.0, standard deviation 6.7) and 89 after a subsequent review. The scores of patients referred for FSA were significantly worse than those managed in the Joint Clinic (P < .001). Of the 143 referred for FSA, 115 underwent or were awaiting surgery, 18 were recommended surgery but scored below prioritization threshold, and 10 were not recommended surgery. The Oxford scores of the 194 patients managed non-operatively improved from 22.0 to 25.0 (P = .0013). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the Joint Clinic was effective as a triage tool with 93% of those referred for FSA being recommended surgery. This has freed up surgeon time to see only those patients most in need of surgical assessment.