Barriers and facilitators for implementing lifestyle-related treatment modalities in osteoarthritis: A cross-sectional study among primary and secondary healthcare professionals.

PURPOSE: To identify barriers and facilitators as perceived by primary and secondary healthcare professionals (HCPs) when implementing lifestyle-related treatment modalities (LRTMs) in patients with hip/knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A cross-sectional study. A Dutch online survey was distributed among eight different disciplines of primary and secondary HCPs. Potential barriers and facilitators were identified based on participants' responses to 32 research-derived statements on implementing LRTMs, and presented as factors with "major agreement" (≥75%), "minor agreement" (60-75%) or "no agreement" (<60%). RESULTS: 213 participants completed the survey. Seven "barriers" and 20 "facilitators" were identified. There were three "major agreement barriers": organization of Dutch healthcare system, audits within organization, and lifestyle climate in Dutch society. The top three "major agreement facilitators" were: health effects on patients, safety of increasing physical activity, and personal attitude. The total number of "barriers" differed per HCP discipline, with the highest number (12) among orthopedic surgeons (or in-training) and the lowest number (4) among dieticians, physiotherapists, and lifestyle counselors. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that implementing LRTMs within OA care could be improved by focusing on societal rather than individual HCP factors. National preventive policies on health promotion could counteract the expected increase in healthcare demand and costs due to OA and other chronic diseases. Future research is needed to match relevant implementation strategies to all barriers identified.

Implementing lifestyle-related treatment modalities in osteoarthritis care: Identification of implementation strategies using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change matching tool.

AIMS: Despite recommendations in international clinical guidelines, lifestyle-related treatment modalities (LRTMs) are currently underutilised in the conservative treatment of patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis. This study aimed to identify implementation strategies in order to address barriers to implementing LRTMs from the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs). METHODS: The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Implementation Strategy Matching Tool was applied. First, previously identified influencing factors among primary and secondary HCPs were mapped onto the corresponding CFIR constructs/subconstructs by two researchers. Second, the CFIR-based barriers relevant for all HCPs were entered into the tool. Third, the CFIR-based barriers specific to one or more subgroups of HCPs served as additional input for the tool. Finally, a selection of ERIC implementation strategies was made based on the tool's output. RESULTS: Fourteen implementation strategies were selected. The strategy most endorsed by the tool was 'build a coalition'. Eight of the selected strategies belonged to the ERIC cluster 'develop stakeholder interrelationships'. Other strategies were part of the clusters 'use evaluative and iterative strategies' (n = 3), 'utilise financial strategies' (n = 2), and 'engage consumers' (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: The findings emphasise the importance of an interdisciplinary approach when addressing the implementation of LRTMs in osteoarthritis care. The final selection of implementation strategies forms the basis for a tailored implementation plan. Future work should focus on further operationalising the implementation strategies and evaluating the effectiveness of the resulting implementation plan.

Barriers and facilitators perceived by healthcare professionals for implementing lifestyle interventions in patients with osteoarthritis: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of barriers and facilitators that healthcare professionals (HCPs) perceive regarding the implementation of lifestyle interventions (LIs) in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: The databases PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to January 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Primary research articles with a quantitative, qualitative or mixed-methods design were eligible for inclusion if they reported: (1) perceptions of primary and/or secondary HCPs (population); (2) on implementing LIs with physical activity and/or weight management as key components (concept) and (3) on conservative management of hip and/or knee OA (context). Articles not published in English, German or Dutch were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Barriers and facilitators were extracted by two researchers independently. Subsequently, the extracted factors were linked to a framework based on the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases checklist. RESULTS: Thirty-six articles were included. In total, 809 factors were extracted and subdivided into nine domains. The extracted barriers were mostly related to non-optimal interdisciplinary collaboration, patients' negative attitude towards LIs, patients' low health literacy and HCPs' lack of knowledge and skills around LIs or promoting behavioural change. The extracted facilitators were mostly related to good interdisciplinary collaboration, a positive perception of HCPs' own role in implementing LIs, the content or structure of LIs and HCPs' positive attitude towards LIs. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple individual and environmental factors influence the implementation of LIs by HCPs in patients with hip and/or knee OA. The resulting overview of barriers and facilitators can guide future research on the implementation of LIs within OA care. To investigate whether factor frequency is related to the relevance of each domain, further research should assess the relative importance of the identified factors involving all relevant disciplines of primary and secondary HCPs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019129348.

What affects the implementation of lifestyle interventions in patients with osteoarthritis? A multidisciplinary focus group study among healthcare professionals.

PURPOSE: To identify factors affecting the implementation of lifestyle interventions (LIs) in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA) from the perspective of primary and secondary healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the Dutch healthcare system. METHODS: Multidisciplinary focus groups were composed. Data analysis was performed following thematic analysis. The Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases checklist was used to guide data analysis. RESULTS: Four focus groups meetings were conducted with 38 participating HCPs (general practitioners (or in-training), orthopedic surgeons (or in-training), physiotherapists, dieticians, a general practice assistant, lifestyle counselors, and nurse practitioners). Influencing factors were grouped into nine themes: (1) intervention factors; (2) individual HCP factors; (3) patient factors; (4) professional interactions; (5) incentives and resources; (6) capacity for organizational change; (7) social, political and legal factors; (8) patient and HCP interactions; and (9) disease factors. CONCLUSIONS: A wide variety of factors affecting the implementation of LIs was identified in this study, where the importance of effective interdisciplinary collaboration was emphasized by the multidisciplinary group of participants. This thorough analysis of influencing factors is an important first step toward improved implementation of LIs within OA care. Further research is required to identify the most significant targets for change in daily practice.Implications for RehabilitationThe implementation of lifestyle interventions (LIs) by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA) is affected by both individual and environmental factors.The influencing factors identified in this study can support the development of interventions aimed at improving the implementation of LIs in OA care.A multilevel approach is required when developing interventions to improve the implementation of LIs in OA care.Continued efforts of both primary and secondary HCPs and policymakers are needed in order to promote the use of LIs within OA care.

The therapeutic validity and effectiveness of physiotherapeutic exercise following total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the therapeutic validity and effectiveness of physiotherapeutic exercise interventions following total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis. DATA SOURCES: The databases Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and AMED were searched from inception up to February 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles reporting results of randomized controlled trials in which physiotherapeutic exercise was compared with usual care or with a different type of physiotherapeutic exercise were included, with the applied interventions starting within six months after THA. Only articles written in English, German or Dutch were included. STUDY APPRAISAL: Therapeutic validity (using the CONTENT scale) and risk of bias (using both the PEDro scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool) were assessed by two researchers independently. Characteristics of the physiotherapeutic exercise interventions and results about joint and muscle function, functional performance and self-reported outcomes were extracted. RESULTS: Of the 1124 unique records retrieved, twenty articles were included. Only one article was considered to be of high therapeutic validity. Description and adequacy of patient selection were the least reported items. The majority of the articles was considered as having potentially high risk of bias, according to both assessment tools. The level of therapeutic validity did not correspond with the risk of bias scores. Because of the wide variety in characteristics of the physiotherapeutic exercise and control interventions, follow-up length and outcome measures, limited evidence was found on the effectiveness of physiotherapeutic exercise following THA. CONCLUSION: The insufficient therapeutic validity and potentially high risk of bias in studies involving physiotherapeutic exercise interventions limit the ability to assess the effectiveness of these interventions following THA. Researchers are advised to take both quality scores into account when developing and reporting studies involving physiotherapeutic exercise. Uniformity in intervention characteristics and outcome measures is necessary to enhance the comparability of clinical outcomes between trials.

Musculoskeletal complaints in individuals with finger or partial hand amputations in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: To compare the prevalence of musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs) in individuals with finger or partial hand amputations (FPHAs) with a control group and to explore the effect and predictors of MSCs in individuals with FPHAs. METHOD: A questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted. The primary outcome measures were: prevalence of MSCs, health status, pain-related disability, physical work demands, work productivity, and hand function. RESULTS: The response rate was 61%. A comparable proportion of individuals with FPHAs (n = 99) and controls (n = 102) reported MSCs in the preceding 4 weeks (33% vs. 28%, respectively) or in the preceding year (37% vs. 33%, respectively). Individuals with FPHAs with MSCs experienced more pain than controls with MSCs. Regular occurrence of stump sensations and self-reported limited range of motion (ROM) of the wrist of the affected limb were predictors for MSCs in individuals with FPHAs. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of MSCs was comparable in individuals with FPHAs and controls. However, clinicians should pay special attention to the risk of developing MSCs in patients with stump sensations and limited ROM of the wrist of the affected limb. Future research should focus on the role of wrist movements and compensatory movements in the development of MSCs in individuals with FPHAs. Implications for Rehabilitation The prevalence of musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs) in individuals with finger or partial hand amputations (FPHAs) and control subjects was similar. Regular occurrence of stump sensations and limited range of motion of the wrist of the affected limb were predictors of developing MSCs in individuals with FPHAs. Clinicians should pay special attention to individuals with FPHAs with the presence of these predictors of developing MSCs. For a better understanding of the development of and treatment options for MSCs, future research focusing on the role of wrist function in the development of MSCs in individuals with FPHAs is necessary.