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.

Evaluation of intermediate care for knee and hip osteoarthritis: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate intermediate care for knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) in the general practice that incorporate specialist services into general practice to prevent unnecessary referrals to hospitals. METHODS: We used a mixed methods approach including semi-structured interviews, patient experience questionnaires and data from medical records from three intermediate care projects. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients, general practitioners (GPs), orthopaedists and a healthcare manager in intermediate care. Satisfaction of patients who received intermediate care (n = 100) was collected using questionnaires. Referral data and healthcare consumption from medical records were collected retrospectively from KHOA patients before (n = 96) and after (n = 208) the implementation of intermediate care. RESULTS: GPs and orthopaedists in intermediate care experienced more intensive collaboration compared to regular care. This led to a perceived increase in GPs' knowledge enabling better selection of referrals to orthopaedics and less healthcare consumption. Orthopaedists felt a higher workload and limited access to diagnostic facilities. Patients were satisfied and experienced better access to specialists' knowledge in a trusted environment compared to regular care. Referrals to physiotherapy increased significantly after the implementation of intermediate care (absolute difference = 15%; 95% CI = 7.19 to 22.8), but not significantly to orthopaedics (absolute difference = 5.9%; 95% CI = -6.18 to 17.9). CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedists and GPs perceived the benefits of an intensified collaboration in intermediate care. Intermediate care may contribute to high quality of care through more physiotherapy referrals. Further research with longer follow-up is needed to confirm these findings and give more insight in referrals and healthcare consumption.

Quality indicators for knee and hip osteoarthritis care: a systematic review.

To provide an overview of quality indicators (QIs) for knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) care and to highlight differences in healthcare settings. A database search was conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL and Google Scholar, OpenGrey and Prospective Trial Register, up to March 2020. Studies developing or adapting existing QI(s) for patients with osteoarthritis were eligible for inclusion. Included studies were categorised into healthcare settings. QIs from included studies were categorised into structure, process and outcome of care. Within these categories, QIs were grouped into themes (eg, physical therapy). A narrative synthesis was used to describe differences and similarities between healthcare settings. We included 20 studies with a total of 196 QIs mostly related to the process of care in different healthcare settings. Few studies included patients' perspectives. Rigorous methods for evidence synthesis to develop QIs were rarely used. Narrative analysis showed differences in QIs between healthcare settings with regard to exercise therapy, weight counselling, referral to laboratory tests and 'do not do' QIs. Differences within the same healthcare setting were identified on radiographic assessment. The heterogeneity in QIs emphasise the necessity to carefully select QIs for KHOA depending on the healthcare setting. This review provides an overview of QIs outlined to their healthcare settings to support healthcare providers and policy makers in selecting the contextually appropriate QIs to validly monitor the quality of KHOA care. We strongly recommend to review QIs against the most recent guidelines before implementing them into practice.

The incidence and management of shoulder complaints in general practice: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is the third most common musculoskeletal complaint in primary care. The international guidelines for general practitioners (GPs) recommend a stepwise treatment of shoulder pain. Little is known about the actual distribution of these treatments in current practice. OBJECTIVE: To gain insight in the incidence and current management of shoulder complaints in Dutch general practice. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a health care database containing the full electronic medical records of approximately 200 000 patients in Dutch general practice. A search algorithm was constructed to identify incident cases of shoulder complaints from January 2012 to December 2017. Data on the management of shoulder complaints were manually validated in a random sample of 1000 cases. RESULTS: The overall incidence of shoulder complaints was 30.3 (95% confidence interval 29.9-30.7) per 1000 person-years. More than half of the patients (58.6%) consulted their GP only once, 44.4% two times or more and 19.7% three times or more. For most patients (58.1%), the GP applied a wait-and-see policy or prescription of oral medication in the first consultation. However, no less than 42.9% of the patients were referred or received an injection already in the first consultation. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variety of treatments for shoulder complaints applied by the GP. Some patients are referred or received an injection already in the first consultation. The stepwise approach recommended by the guideline, might not always be applicable due to the diversity of patient- and shoulder characteristics presented in general practice.

Subgroup analyses of the effectiveness of oral glucosamine for knee and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis from the OA trial bank.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of oral glucosamine in subgroups of people with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) based on baseline pain severity, body mass index (BMI), sex, structural abnormalities and presence of inflammation using individual patient data. METHODS: After a systematic search of the literature and clinical trial registries, all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of any oral glucosamine substance in patients with clinically or radiographically defined hip or knee OA were contacted. As a minimum, pain, age, sex and BMI at baseline and pain as an outcome measure needed to be assessed. RESULTS: Of 21 eligible studies, six (n=1663) shared their trial data with the OA Trial Bank. Five trials (all independent of industry, n=1625) compared glucosamine with placebo, representing 55% of the total number of participants in all published placebo-controlled RCTs. Glucosamine was no better than placebo for pain or function at short (3 months) and long-term (24 months) follow-up. Glucosamine was also no better than placebo among the predefined subgroups. Stratification for knee OA and type of glucosamine did not alter these results. CONCLUSIONS: Although proposed and debated for several years, open trial data are not widely made available for studies of glucosamine for OA, especially those sponsored by industry. Currently, there is no good evidence to support the use of glucosamine for hip or knee OA and an absence of evidence to support specific consideration of glucosamine for any clinically relevant OA subgroup according to baseline pain severity, BMI, sex, structural abnormalities or presence of inflammation.

Associations between weather conditions and clinical symptoms in patients with hip osteoarthritis: a 2-year cohort study.

The goal of this study was to assess whether there is an association between ambient weather conditions and patients' clinical symptoms in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). The design was a cohort study with a 2-year follow-up and 3-monthly measurements and prospectively collected data on weather variables. The study population consisted of 222 primary care patients with hip OA. Weather variables included temperature, wind speed, total amount of sun hours, precipitation, barometric pressure, and relative humidity. The primary outcomes were severity of hip pain and hip disability as measured with the Western Ontario and McMasters University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and function subscales. Associations between hip pain and hip disability and the weather variables were assessed using crude and multivariate adjusted linear mixed-model analysis for repeated measurements. On the day of questionnaire completion, mean relative humidity was associated with WOMAC pain (estimate 0.1; 95% confidence interval=0.0-0.2; P=.02). Relative humidity contributed < or = 1% to the explained within-patient variance and between-patient variance of the WOMAC pain score. Mean barometric pressure was associated with WOMAC function (estimate 0.1; 95% confidence interval=0.0-0.1; P=.02). Barometric pressure contributed < or = 1% to the explained within-patient variance and between-patient variance of the WOMAC function score. The other weather variables were not associated with the WOMAC pain or function score. Our results support the general opinion of OA patients that barometric pressure and relative humidity influence perceived OA symptoms. However, the contribution of these weather variables (< or = 1%) to the severity of OA symptoms is not considered to be clinically relevant.

Defining discriminative pain trajectories in hip osteoarthritis over a 2-year time period.

BACKGROUND: Although pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) generally deteriorates over time, there is a large individual variation in the course of pain. This study examines the different longitudinal trajectories of patients with hip pain due to OA. METHODS: Data from a previously performed randomised controlled trial were used to investigate the course of pain over 2 years in 222 patients with clinically and radiographically determined hip OA. Pain was measured with a visual analogue scale (0-100). Latent class growth analysis was used to determine the number of trajectories of patients with hip pain due to OA. RESULTS: Analyses yielded five trajectories of pain due to hip OA. Trajectory 1 ('mild pain'; n=69) consists of patients with stable mild pain. Patients in trajectory 2 ('moderate pain'; n=31) fluctuated slightly between moderate and severe pain levels. Trajectory 3 ('always pain'; n=32) consists of patients with severe pain. Patients in trajectory 4 ('regularly progressing'; n=48) started with mild pain and progressed slowly to moderate pain. Trajectory 5 ('highly progressing'; n=42) patients also started with mild pain but quickly progressed to severe pain over 2 years. Compared with the 'mild pain' group, patients in the 'always pain' group had more severe radiographic hip OA, morning stiffness and decreased range of motion. The 'highly progressing' group had more severe radiographic hip OA and morning stiffness. CONCLUSIONS: Latent class growth analysis applied to longitudinal data of patients with hip OA identified five distinct trajectories of pain. More studies are needed to externally validate these findings.

Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry analysis contributes to the prediction of hip osteoarthritis progression.

INTRODUCTION: To determine if structural bone parameters obtained from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) contribute to the prediction of progression of hip osteoarthritis (OA) and to test if the difference between the most affected (OA) hip and the contralateral hip adds to this prediction. METHODS: The study group involves a prospective cohort of 189 patients that met the American College of Rheumatology (ARC) classification criteria for hip osteoarthritis. Progression was defined as 20% joint space narrowing or total hip replacement within a two years follow up. Software was developed to calculate geometrical aspects and bone mineral density (BMD) in different regions of interest of the proximal femur. Logistic regression was used to test if Kellgren and Lawrence (K-L) scores and DXA parameters can predict progression of OA. Models were compared using -2log likelihood tests, R2 Nagelkerke and areas under the Receiver Operator Characteristic curves, assessed using 10-fold cross validation. RESULTS: The model that included the DXA variables was significantly better in predicting hip OA progression than the model with K-L score of the affected side alone (P < 0.01). The addition of the differences in DXA parameters between the most affected and contralateral hip in the superior part of the femoral head, trochanteric and intertrochanteric area further improved the prediction of progression (P < 0.05). K-L score of the affected side was still the most significant single variable in the models. CONCLUSIONS: DXA parameters can significantly contribute to the prediction of progression in patients with hip osteoarthritis. The analysis of the DXA differences between the hips of the patient represents a small but significant contribution to this prediction. These analyses show the importance of bone density changes in the etiology of OA.

Effect of glucosamine sulfate on hip osteoarthritis: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of glucosamine sulfate as a symptom and disease modifier for osteoarthritis is still under debate. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether glucosamine sulfate has an effect on the symptoms and structural progression of hip osteoarthritis during 2 years of treatment. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Primary care in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: 222 patients with hip osteoarthritis who were recruited by their general practitioner. Patients were eligible if they met the American College of Rheumatology clinical criteria for hip osteoarthritis. INTERVENTION: 2 years of treatment with 1500 mg of oral glucosamine sulfate or placebo once daily. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) pain and function subscales over 24 months and joint space narrowing after 24 months. The main secondary outcome measures were WOMAC pain, function, and stiffness after 3, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS: At baseline, both groups were similar in demographic and clinical variables. Overall, WOMAC pain did not differ (mean difference [glucosamine sulfate minus placebo], -1.54 [95% CI, -5.43 to 2.36]), nor did WOMAC function (mean difference, -2.01 [CI, -5.38 to 1.36]). Joint space narrowing also did not differ after 24 months (mean difference, -0.029 [CI, -0.122 to 0.064]). Only 1 of the sensitivity analyses, based on extreme assumptions regarding missing assessments due to total hip replacement, provided results consistent with a glucosamine effect. LIMITATIONS: Twenty patients had total hip replacement during the trial. Half of the patients had a Kellgren and Lawrence score of 1. CONCLUSION: Glucosamine sulfate was no better than placebo in reducing symptoms and progression of hip osteoarthritis. International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN54513166.

The effect of glucosamine sulphate on osteoarthritis: design of a long-term randomised clinical trial [ISRCTN54513166].

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological treatment for osteoarthritis (OA) can be divided into two groups: symptom-modifying drugs and disease-modifying drugs. Symptom-modifying drugs are currently the prescription of choice for patients with OA, as disease-modifying drugs are not yet available in usual care. However, there has recently been a lot of debate about glucosamine sulphate (GS), a biological agent that is thought to have both symptom-modifying and disease-modifying properties. This assumption has yet to be proved. The objective of this article is to present the design of a blind randomised clinical trial that examines the long-term symptom-modifying and disease-modifying effectiveness of GS in patients with hip OA. This trial is ongoing and will finish in March 2006. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients with hip OA meeting the ACR-criteria are randomly allocated to either 1500 mg of oral GS or placebo for the duration of two years. The primary outcome measures, which are joint space narrowing (JSN), and change in the pain and function score of the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), are determined at baseline and after two years of follow-up during the final assessment. Intermediate measures at three-month intervals throughout the trial are used to study secondary outcome measures. Secondary outcome measures are changes in WOMAC stiffness score, quality of life, medical consumption, side effects and differences in biomarker CTX-II.