Comparative differences in musculoskeletal pain consultation and analgesic prescription for people with dementia: a UK-wide matched cohort study.

ABSTRACT: Painful musculoskeletal conditions are common in older adults; however, pain identification, assessment, and management are reported to be suboptimal for people with dementia. Adequate pain management is an integral aspect of care for people with dementia to prevent or delay negative outcomes, such as behavioural and psychological changes, emergency department attendance, and premature nursing home admission. This study aims to examine musculoskeletal consultations and analgesic prescriptions for people with dementia compared with those for people without dementia. A dementia cohort (n = 36,582) and matched cohort were identified in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (a UK-wide primary care database). Period prevalence for musculoskeletal consultations and analgesic prescriptions was described, and logistic regression applied to estimate associations between dementia and musculoskeletal consultation or analgesic prescription from the time of dementia diagnosis to 5 years after diagnosis. People with dementia had a consistently (over time) lower prevalence and odds of musculoskeletal consultation and analgesic prescription compared with people without dementia. The evidence suggests that pain management may be suboptimal for people with dementia. These results highlight the need to increase awareness of pain and use better methods of pain assessment, evaluation of treatment response, and acceptable and effective management for people with dementia, in primary care.

The challenge of pain identification, assessment, and management in people with dementia: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Painful conditions are common in older adults, including people with dementia. The symptoms associated with dementia (for example, diminished language capacity, memory impairment, and behavioural changes), however, may lead to the suboptimal identification, assessment, and management of pain. Research has yet to qualitatively explore pain management for community-dwelling people with dementia. AIM: To explore pain identification, assessment, and management for community-dwelling people with dementia. DESIGN & SETTING: A qualitative study was undertaken, set in England. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews took place with people with dementia, family caregivers, GPs, and old-age psychiatrists. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with eight people with dementia, nine family caregivers, nine GPs, and five old-age psychiatrists. Three themes were identified that related to pain identification and assessment: gathering information to identify pain; the importance of knowing the person; and the use of pain assessment tools. A further three themes were identified that related to pain management: non-drug strategies; concerns related to analgesic medications; and responsibility of the caregiver to manage pain. CONCLUSION: Identifying and assessing the pain experienced by people with dementia was challenging. Most people with dementia, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals supported non-drug strategies to manage pain. The minimal concerns associated with non-drug strategies contrasted the multifactorial concerns associated with analgesic treatment for people with dementia. Given the complexity of pain identification, assessment, and management, primary care should work together with family caregivers and community services, with case finding for pain being considered in all assessment and management plans.

Pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the current literature on pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia. METHOD: A comprehensive systematic search of the literature with narrative synthesis was conducted. Eight major bibliographic databases were searched in October 2018. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were sequentially screened. Standardised data extraction and quality appraisal exercises were conducted. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included in the review, 11 reporting findings on pain assessment tools or methods and 27 reporting findings on treatments for pain. In regard to pain assessment, a large proportion of people with moderate to severe dementia were unable to complete a self-report pain instrument. Pain was more commonly reported by informal caregivers than the person with dementia themselves. Limited evidence was available for pain-focused behavioural observation assessment. In regard to pain treatment, paracetamol use was more common in community-dwelling people with dementia compared with people without dementia. However, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were used less. For stronger analgesics, community-dwelling people with dementia were more likely to receive strong opioids (eg, fentanyl) than people without dementia. CONCLUSION: This review identifies a dearth of high-quality studies exploring pain assessment and/or treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia, not least into non-pharmacological interventions. The consequences of this lack of evidence, given the current and projected prevalence of the disease, are very serious and require urgent redress. In the meantime, clinicians should adopt a patient- and caregiver-centred, multi-dimensional, longitudinal approach to pain assessment and pain treatment for this population.

Development and validation of a pain monitoring app for patients with musculoskeletal conditions (The Keele pain recorder feasibility study).

BACKGROUND: Assessing daily change in pain and related symptoms help in diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring response to treatment. However, such changes are infrequently assessed, and usually reviewed weeks or months after the start of treatment. We therefore developed a smartphone application (Keele Pain Recorder) to record information on the severity and impact of pain on daily life. Specifically, the study goal was to assess face, content and construct validity of data collection using the Pain Recorder in primary care patients receiving new analgesic prescriptions for musculoskeletal pain, as well as to assess its acceptability and clinical utility. METHODS: The app was developed with Keele's Research User Group (RUG), a clinical advisory group (CAG) and software developer for use on Android devices. The app recorded pain levels, interference, sleep disturbance, analgesic use, mood and side effects. In a feasibility study, patients aged > 18 attending their general practitioner (GP) with a painful musculoskeletal condition were recruited to use the app twice per day for 28 days. Face and construct validity were assessed through baseline and post-study questionnaires (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient). Usability and acceptability were determined through post-study questionnaires, and patient, GP, RUG and CAG interviews. RESULTS: An app was developed which was liked by both patients and GPs. It was felt that it offered the opportunity for GPs to discuss pain control with their patients in a new way. All participants found the app easy to use (it did not interfere with their activities) and results easy to interpret. Strong associations existed between the first 3 days (Spearman r = 0.79) and last 3 days (r = 0.60) of pain levels and intensity scores on the app with the validated questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Collaborating with patient representatives and clinical stakeholders, we developed an app which can be used to help clinicians and patients monitor painful musculoskeletal conditions in response to analgesic prescribing. Recordings were accurate and valid, especially, for pain intensity ratings, and it was easy to use. Future work needs to examine how pain trajectories can help manage changes in a patient's condition, ultimately assisting in self-management.

Risk of adverse events in patients prescribed long-term opioids: A cohort study in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

BACKGROUND: Long-term opioid prescribing for musculoskeletal pain is controversial due to uncertainty regarding effectiveness and safety. This study examined the risks of a range of adverse events in a large cohort of patients prescribed long-term opioids using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. METHODS: Patients with musculoskeletal conditions starting a new long-term opioid episode (defined as ≥3 opioid prescriptions within 90 days) between 2002 and 2012 were included. Primary outcomes: major trauma and intentional overdose (any). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: addiction (any), falls, accidental poisoning, attempted suicide/self-harm, gastrointestinal pathology and bleeding, and iron deficiency anaemia. "Control" outcomes (unrelated to opioid use): incident eczema and psoriasis. RESULTS: A total of 98,140 new long-term opioids users (median age 61, 41% male) were followed for (median) 3.4 years. Major trauma risk increased from 285 per 10,000 person-years without long-term opioids to 369/10,000 for a long-term opioid episode (<20 mg MED), 382/10,000 (20-50 mg MED), and 424/10,000 (≥50 mg MED). Adjusted hazard ratios were 1.09 (95% CI; 1.04, 1.14 for <20 mg MED vs. not being in an episode of long-term prescribing), 1.24 (95% CI; 1.16, 1.32: 20-50 mg MED) and 1.34 (95% CI; 1.20, 1.50: ≥50 mg MED). Significant dose-dependent increases in the risk of overdose (any type), addiction, falls, accidental poisoning, gastrointestinal pathology, and iron deficiency anaemia were also found. CONCLUSIONS: Patients prescribed long-term opioids are vulnerable to dose-dependent serious adverse events. Opioid prescribing should be reviewed before long-term use becomes established, and periodically thereafter to ensure that patients are not being exposed to increased risk of harm, which is not balanced by therapeutic benefit. SIGNIFICANCE: Long-term opioid use is associated with serious adverse events such as major trauma, addiction and overdose. The risk increases with higher opioid doses. Opioid prescribing should be reviewed before long-term use becomes established, and periodically thereafter to assess ongoing effectiveness.

Development and validation of prediction models to estimate risk of primary total hip and knee replacements using data from the UK: two prospective open cohorts using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVES: The ability to efficiently and accurately predict future risk of primary total hip and knee replacement (THR/TKR) in earlier stages of osteoarthritis (OA) has potentially important applications. We aimed to develop and validate two models to estimate an individual's risk of primary THR and TKR in patients newly presenting to primary care. METHODS: We identified two cohorts of patients aged ≥40 years newly consulting hip pain/OA and knee pain/OA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Candidate predictors were identified by systematic review, novel hypothesis-free 'Record-Wide Association Study' with replication, and panel consensus. Cox proportional hazards models accounting for competing risk of death were applied to derive risk algorithms for THR and TKR. Internal-external cross-validation (IECV) was then applied over geographical regions to validate two models. RESULTS: 45 predictors for THR and 53 for TKR were identified, reviewed and selected by the panel. 301 052 and 416 030 patients newly consulting between 1992 and 2015 were identified in the hip and knee cohorts, respectively (median follow-up 6 years). The resultant model C-statistics is 0.73 (0.72, 0.73) and 0.79 (0.78, 0.79) for THR (with 20 predictors) and TKR model (with 24 predictors), respectively. The IECV C-statistics ranged between 0.70-0.74 (THR model) and 0.76-0.82 (TKR model); the IECV calibration slope ranged between 0.93-1.07 (THR model) and 0.92-1.12 (TKR model). CONCLUSIONS: Two prediction models with good discrimination and calibration that estimate individuals' risk of THR and TKR have been developed and validated in large-scale, nationally representative data, and are readily automated in electronic patient records.

Trends in prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with cardiovascular disease: influence of national guidelines in UK primary care.

Background: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to treat pain, but have potential side effects in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Objectives: To determine trends in NSAIDs prescribing between 2002 and 2010 in patients with CVD, and ascertain whether prescribing patterns changed following publication of major national (the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)) guidance to GPs. Methods: This was an observational database study of adult patients in 11 practices (Staffordshire, England). NSAIDs were categorised into basic, COX-2 and topical. Study duration was divided on a quarterly basis from 2002-quarter-1 to 2010q4. CVD patients were identified using pre-defined Read Codes recorded in the two years prior to each quarter. Quarterly prevalence was determined. Times of significant changes in prescribing trends were determined using Joinpoint Regression, and compared to dates of the five major guidelines (in 2004q4, 2005q1, 2005q3, 2006q4, 2008q1). Results: In CVD patients, the prescription of basic NSAIDs showed a decreasing trend throughout the study period, from 774 (95% CI, 691-863) per 10000 patients in 2002q1 to 245 (204-291) in 2010q4. COX-2 prescribing increased from 232/10000 (187-286) in 2002q1 to 403/10000 (348-464) in 2004q3. Prescribing then fell sharply to 102/10000 (76-134) in 2005q2 before stabilising around 55/10000. Topical NSAIDs prescribing showed a steady increase, starting at 115/10000 (108-123) in 2002q1 and ending at 270/10000 (258-281) in 2010q4. Similar trends were observed in patients without CVD, particularly a sharp drop in COX-2 prescribing also occurred from 2004q4 when initial MHRA guidance was issued. Conclusion: Despite guidelines and a trend toward decreased prescribing, the use of potentially harmful NSAIDs continued in CVD patients. The MHRA directives potentially might have affected patients without CVD who may have inappropriately restricted their use of COX-2.

Population trends in the incidence and initial management of osteoarthritis: age-period-cohort analysis of the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, 1992-2013.

Objective: To determine recent trends in the rate and management of new cases of OA presenting to primary healthcare using UK nationally representative data. Methods: Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink we identified new cases of diagnosed OA and clinical OA (including OA-relevant peripheral joint pain in those aged over 45 years) using established code lists. For both definitions we estimated annual incidence density using exact person-time, and undertook descriptive analysis and age-period-cohort modelling. Demographic characteristics and management were described for incident cases in each calendar year. Sensitivity analyses explored the robustness of the findings to key assumptions. Results: Between 1992 and 2013 the annual age-sex standardized incidence rate for clinical OA increased from 29.2 to 40.5/1000 person-years. After controlling for period effects, the consultation incidence of clinical OA was higher for successive cohorts born after the mid-1950s, particularly women. In contrast, with the exception of hand OA, we observed no increase in the incidence of diagnosed OA: 8.6/1000 person-years in 2004 down to 6.3 in 2013. In 2013, 16.4% of clinical OA cases had an X-ray referral. While NSAID prescriptions fell from 2004, the proportion prescribed opioid analgesia rose markedly (0.1% of diagnosed OA in 1992 to 1.9% in 2013). Conclusion: Rising rates of clinical OA, continued use of plain radiography and a shift towards opioid analgesic prescription are concerning. Our findings support the search for policies to tackle this common problem that promote joint pain prevention while avoiding excessive and inappropriate health care.

Comprehensive systematic review of long-term opioids in women with chronic noncancer pain and associated reproductive dysfunction (hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis disruption).

A comprehensive systematic literature review of reproductive side effects in women aged 18 to 55 years treated with opioids for 1 month or longer for chronic noncancer pain. A search of 7 databases including EMBASE and Medline was undertaken (October 2014 and a limited rerun April 2016). The search contained key words for opioids (generic and specific drug names) and side effects (generic and specific reproductive). Titles were screened using predefined criteria by a single reviewer and abstracts and full texts by 2 independent reviewers. A total of 10,684 articles were identified and 12 full texts (cohort [n = 1], case-control [n = 4], cross-sectional [n = 4], case series [n = 1], and case report [n = 2] with a maximum of 41 cases in 1 article) were included covering 3 different modes of administration: oral (n = 6), intrathecal (n = 5), and transdermal (n = 1). Amenorrhoea occurred in 23% to 71% of those receiving oral or intrathecal opioids. Decreased libido was seen in 61% to 100%. Of the 10 studies that undertook hormonal assays, only 2 studies showed a statistically significant decrease in hormone levels. This review supports the view that there is a potential relationship between the use of long-term opioids in women and reproductive side effects. The evidence is however weak and the mode of administration, duration, type, and dose of opioid might influence associations. Although hormone levels were statistically significant in only 2 studies, women exhibited clinically important symptoms (decreased libido and altered menstrual cycle). Further investigation is required with larger cohorts and analysis of different delivery methods.

Weighted cumulative exposure models helped identify an association between early knee-pain consultations and future knee OA diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the association between prior knee-pain consultations and early diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (OA) by weighted cumulative exposure (WCE) models. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Data were from an electronic health care record (EHR) database (Consultations in Primary Care Archive). WCE functions for modeling the cumulative effect of time-varying knee-pain consultations weighted by recency were derived as a predictive tool in a population-based case-control sample and validated in a prospective cohort sample. Two WCE functions ([i] weighting of the importance of past consultations determined a priori; [ii] flexible spline-based estimation) were comprehensively compared with two simpler models ([iii] time since most recent consultation; total number of past consultations) on model goodness of fit, discrimination, and calibration both in derivation and validation phases. RESULTS: People with the most recent and most frequent knee-pain consultations were more likely to have high WCE scores that were associated with increased risk of knee OA diagnosis both in derivation and validation phases. Better model goodness of fit, discrimination, and calibration were observed for flexible spline-based WCE models. CONCLUSION: WCE functions can be used to model prediagnostic symptoms within routine EHR data and provide novel low-cost predictive tools contributing to early diagnosis.

Trends in long-term opioid prescribing in primary care patients with musculoskeletal conditions: an observational database study.

Long-term opioids may benefit patients with chronic pain but have also been linked to harmful outcomes. In the United Kingdom, the predominant source of opioids is primary care prescription. The objective was to examine changes in the incidence, length, and opioid potency of long-term prescribing episodes for musculoskeletal conditions in UK primary care (2002-2013). This was an observational database study (Clinical Practice Research Datalink, 190 practices). Participants (≥18 years) were prescribed an opioid for a musculoskeletal condition (no opioid prescribed in previous 6 months), and issued ≥2 opioid prescriptions within 90 days (long-term episode). Opioids were divided into short- and long-acting noncontrolled and controlled drugs. Annual incidence of long-term opioid episodes was determined, and for those still in a long-term episode, the percentage of patients prescribed each type 1 to 2 years, and >2 years after initiation. Annual denominator population varied from 1.25 to 1.38 m. A total of 76,416 patients started 1 long-term episode. Annual long-term episode incidence increased (2002-2009) by 38% (42.4-58.3 per 10,000 person-years), remaining stable to 2011, then decreasing slightly to 55.8/10,000 (2013). Patients prescribed long-acting controlled opioids within the first 90 days of long-term use increased from 2002 to 2013 (2.3%-9.9%). In those still in a long-term opioid episode (>2 years), long-acting controlled opioid prescribing increased from 3.5% to 22.6%. This study has uniquely shown an increase in prescribing long-term opioids to 2009, gradually decreasing from 2011 in the United Kingdom. The trend was towards increased prescribing of controlled long-acting opioids and earlier use. Further research into the risks and benefits of opioids is required.

Annual consultation incidence of osteoarthritis estimated from population-based health care data in England.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the consultation incidence of OA using population-based health care data in England and compare OA incidence figures with those derived in other countries. METHODS: A population-based health care database (Consultations in Primary Care Archive) in England was used to derive the consultation incidence of OA (overall and by joint site) using the maximum available run-in period method. These estimates, and their distribution by age and sex, were compared with those published from population-based health care databases in Canada, the Netherlands and Spain. A novel age-stratified run-in period method was then used to investigate whether the consultation incidence has been increasing over time in younger adults. RESULTS: The annual consultation incidence of OA (any joint) was 8.6/1000 persons ≥15 years of age (95% CI 7.9, 9.3) [6.3 (95% CI 5.5, 7.1) in men and 10.8 (95% CI 9.8, 12.0) in women]. Incidence increased sharply between 45 and 64 years of age, peaking at 75-84 years. The joint-specific incidence was 1.4 (95% CI 1.1, 1.7), 3.5 (95% CI 3.1, 3.9) and 1.3 (95% CI 1.1, 1.6) for hip OA, knee OA and hand OA, respectively. The estimates and their distribution by age and sex were broadly consistent with international estimates. Between 2003 and 2010, incidence in those aged 35-44 years increased from 0.3 to 2.0/1000 persons. CONCLUSION: Newly diagnosed cases of OA in England occur in 9 in 1000 at-risk adults each year, similar to other international estimates. Although lower, the consultation incidence proportion in younger adults appears to have increased in the past decade.

Sleep disturbance and chronic widespread pain.

Musculoskeletal pain is common and often occurs at multiple sites. Persons with chronic widespread pain (CWP) often report disturbed sleep. Until recently, the relationship between sleep disturbance and CWP has been unclear: does poor sleep increase the risk of developing CWP, do people with CWP develop poor sleep as a consequence of their pain, or is the relationship bi-directional? In this article, we have focused on the relationship between insomnia and CWP. We briefly present descriptive epidemiological data for insomnia and CWP. We then summarise the available evidence which supports the hypothesis that the relationship is bi-directional. Finally, we discuss the clinical management of CWP and insomnia in primary care, where the vast majority of cases of CWP are managed.

Quality of care for OA: the effect of a point-of-care consultation recording template.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine the feasibility of introducing a computerized template for identifying quality of care during an OA consultation, describe quality of OA care in practices in which the template was introduced and assess the effect of the template on routinely recorded clinician behaviour in those practices. METHODS: A computerized template to assist the recording of care in consultations for patients with OA was installed in eight general practices. Eligible patients were those ≥45 years of age consulting for clinical OA during a 6 month period. The main outcomes were frequency of template triggering, achievement of quality indicators during the consultation (assessment of pain and function, assessment for first-line analgesics, provision of information, exercise advice, consideration of physiotherapy referral, weight loss advice) and change in routinely recorded clinician behaviour (diagnostic coding, prescribing, referral, use of radiography, weight records) compared with the 12 months prior to template installation. RESULTS: The template was triggered for 1730 patients. Achievement of indicators ranged from 36% (for consideration of physiotherapy referral) to 63% (for pain assessment), with substantial variability between clinicians. There was an increase in prescription of recommended first-line analgesics following the template installation: paracetamol [odds ratio (OR) 1.49 (95% CI 1.22, 1.82) compared with pre-template] and topical NSAIDs [OR 1.95 (95% CI 1.61, 2.35)]. CONCLUSION: This new template is a feasible tool for capturing data during OA consultations to aid assessment of quality of care. It was associated with significant improvements in recommended care processes. However, strategies are needed to ensure consistent approaches between clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN06984617/mosaics.

Pain medication management of musculoskeletal conditions at first presentation in primary care: analysis of routinely collected medical record data.

BACKGROUND: Primary care pharmacological management of new musculoskeletal conditions is not consistent, despite guidelines which recommend prescribing basic analgesics before higher potency medications such as opioids or non-steroidal inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).The objective was to describe pharmacological management of new musculoskeletal conditions and determine patient characteristics associated with type of medication prescribed. METHODS: The study was set within a UK general practice database, the Consultations in Primary Care Archive (CiPCA). Patients aged 15 plus who had consulted for a musculoskeletal condition in 2006 but without a musculoskeletal consultation or analgesic prescription in the previous 12 months were identified from 12 general practices. Analgesic prescriptions within two weeks of first consultation were identified. The association of socio-demographic and clinical factors with receiving any analgesic prescription, and with strength of analgesic, were evaluated. RESULTS: 3236 patients consulted for a new musculoskeletal problem. 42% received a prescribed pain medication at that time. Of these, 47% were prescribed an NSAID, 24% basic analgesics, 18% moderate strength analgesics, and 11% strong analgesics. Increasing age was associated with an analgesic prescription but reduced likelihood of a prescription of NSAIDs or strong analgesics. Those in less deprived areas were less likely than those in the most deprived areas to be prescribed analgesics (odds ratio 0.69; 95% CI 0.55, 0.86). Those without comorbidity were more likely to be prescribed NSAIDs (relative risk ratios (RRR) compared to basic analgesics 1.89; 95% CI 0.96, 3.73). Prescribing of stronger analgesics was related to prior history of analgesic medication (for example, moderate analgesics RRR 1.88; 95% CI 1.11, 3.10). CONCLUSION: Over half of patients were not prescribed analgesia for a new episode of a musculoskeletal condition, but those that were often received NSAIDs. Analgesic choice appears multifactorial, but associations with age, comorbidity, and prior medication history suggest partial use of guidelines.

Public priorities for joint pain research: results from a general population survey.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify the priorities for joint pain research from a large general population survey and identify characteristics associated with these priorities. METHODS: A question about research priorities was developed in collaboration with the Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre's Research Users' Group. The question was embedded in a postal survey to an existing cohort of adults with self-reported joint pain, aged ≥56 years, in North Staffordshire. Respondents were asked to rank their top three priorities for research. Factor mixture modelling was used to determine subgroups of priorities. RESULTS: In all, 1756 (88%) people responded to the survey. Of these, 1356 (77%) gave three priorities for research. Keeping active was rated the top priority by 38%, followed by research around joint replacement (9%) and diet/weight loss (9%). Two clusters of people were identified: 62% preferred lifestyle/self-management topics (e.g. keeping active, weight loss) and 38% preferred medical intervention topics (e.g. joint replacement, tablets). Those who preferred the medical options tended to be older and have hip or foot pain. CONCLUSION: This study has provided population data on priorities for joint pain research expressed by a large cohort of older people who report joint pain. The most popular topics for research were linked to lifestyle and self-management opportunities. Pharmaceutical and invasive interventions, despite being common topics of research, are of less importance to these respondents than non-medical topics. Specific research questions will be generated from this study with collaboration of the patient's group.

Does comorbid disease influence consultation for knee problems in primary care?

AIM: Knee pain affects 25% of the population aged over 55 years and is the most common complaint of pain among those consulting for primary care. However, a large proportion do not seek help, with up to 50% of those with the most severe form of pain not consulting. Little is known about why this appears to be happening. Our aim was to examine whether consultations for concurrent comorbid disease had any influence on an individual's likelihood of consulting for knee-related problems in primary care. METHODS: This was a case-crossover control study of patients aged over 50 years from three North Staffordshire practices with knee pain followed over a three-year period. All comorbid consultations for the same period were identified. The date of knee consultation cases were identified, and within-subject control days for the same individual were determined for 12 months previously or later where there was no knee consultation. McNemar's test for matched pairs was then carried out to assess whether consultation for either a chronic or acute condition in the preceding three months was associated with knee consultation. RESULTS: A total of 281 participants were included in the case-crossover analysis. There was a lower frequency of chronic comorbid consultations in the three months preceding knee consultation than in either the previous (OR = 0.30; 95% CI 0.11, 0.74) or later control windows (OR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.27, 1.09). There was no difference in the frequency of acute comorbid consultations. FINDINGS: This study suggests that consultations for knee problems are preceded by a period of relatively fewer consultations for other chronic comorbid conditions. Patients might choose to consult for their knee problem when comorbid issues are not a priority. Future research might investigate whether certain comorbid conditions have a greater effect than others, and whether a proactive approach such as screening for knee disorders might improve prognosis?

The discordance between clinical and radiographic knee osteoarthritis: a systematic search and summary of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that the symptoms of knee osteoarthritis (OA) are rather weakly associated with radiographic findings and vice versa. Our objectives were to identify estimates of the prevalence of radiographic knee OA in adults with knee pain and of knee pain in adults with radiographic knee OA, and determine if the definitions of x ray osteoarthritis and symptoms, and variation in demographic factors influence these estimates. METHODS: A systematic literature search identifying population studies which combined x rays, diagnosis, clinical signs and symptoms in knee OA. Estimates of the prevalence of radiographic OA in people with knee pain were determined and vice versa. In addition the effects of influencing factors were scrutinised. RESULTS: The proportion of those with knee pain found to have radiographic osteoarthritis ranged from 15-76%, and in those with radiographic knee OA the proportion with pain ranged from 15% - 81%. Considerable variation occurred with x ray view, pain definition, OA grading and demographic factors CONCLUSION: Knee pain is an imprecise marker of radiographic knee osteoarthritis but this depends on the extent of radiographic views used. Radiographic knee osteoarthritis is likewise an imprecise guide to the likelihood that knee pain or disability will be present. Both associations are affected by the definition of pain used and the nature of the study group. The results of knee x rays should not be used in isolation when assessing individual patients with knee pain.

A cross sectional study of requests for knee radiographs from primary care.

BACKGROUND: Knee pain is the commonest pain complaint amongst older adults in general practice. General Practitioners (GPs) may use x rays when managing knee pain, but little information exists regarding this process. Our objectives, therefore, were to describe the information GPs provide when ordering knee radiographs in older people, to assess the association between a clinical diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) and the presence of radiographic knee OA, and to investigate the clinical content of the corresponding radiologists' report. METHODS: A cross sectional study of GP requests for knee radiographs and their matched radiologists' reports from a local radiology department. Cases, aged over 40, were identified during an 11-week period. The clinical content of the GPs' requests and radiologists' reports was analysed. Associations of radiologists' reporting of i) osteoarthritis, ii) degenerative disease and iii) individual radiographic features of OA, with patient characteristics and clinical details on the GPs' requests, were assessed. RESULTS: The study identified 136 cases with x ray requests from 79 GPs and 11 reporting radiologists. OA was identified clinically in 19 (14%) of the requests, and queried in another 31 (23%). The main clinical descriptor was pain in 119 cases (88%). Radiologists' reported OA in 22% of cases, and the features of OA were mentioned in 63%. Variation in reporting existed between radiologists. The commonest description was joint space narrowing in 52 reports (38%). There was an apparent although non significant increase in the reporting of knee OA when the GP had diagnosed or queried it (OR 1.95; 95% CI 0.76, 5.00). CONCLUSION: The features of radiographic OA are commonly reported in those patients over 40 whom GPs send for x ray. If OA is clinically suspected, radiologists appear to be more likely to report its presence. Further research into alternative models of referral and reporting might identify a more appropriate imaging policy in knee disorders for primary care.

Knee pain and osteoarthritis in the general population: what influences patients to consult?

BACKGROUND: We examined the relationship between predisposing factors, enabling factors and need-related factors with consultation for knee pain in general practice. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of computerized medical records for knee-related consultations in the 18 months before baseline assessment of individuals aged over 50 years reporting knee pain in the previous 12 months. The association between each factor and consultation for consulters compared to non-consulters was summarized using odds ratios (ORs). Interaction between each variable and chronic pain grade was investigated. The association between knee-related consultation and the number and type of other co-morbid consultations was then determined. RESULTS: In total, 742 participants were assessed. Of these, 209 (28%) had a knee-related consultation in the previous 18 months. Recent onset of pain [OR 3.2; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.8, 5.7] and severity of pain, Grade III/IV (OR 3.4; 95% CI 2.1, 5.6), were associated with knee-related consultation. Those rating their knee problem as a health priority were more likely to consult (OR 3.2; 95% CI 1.6, 6.7). Irrespective of knee pain severity, there was no difference in the median number of co-morbid consultations between knee consulters and knee non-consulters. CONCLUSIONS: Need-related factors appeared to be associated with the decision to consult about knee pain. Neither the presence of self-reported selected co-morbid conditions nor the total number of co-morbid conditions was related to consultations for knee pain. Nevertheless, 50% of those with severely disabling knee pain still did not consult for it. Further investigation of this is important in order to optimize care for patients with knee pain and co-morbid disease.