RÉSUMÉ
OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to inform the design and implementation of osteoarthritis (OA) education for people with knee and hip OA. This review investigated the impact of OA education on knowledge, beliefs, and behavior and how and why these changes occur. METHODS: Five databases-MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro)-were searched in August 2023. Eligible studies were quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods, involving OA education interventions and assessing knowledge, beliefs, and/or behavioral outcomes. An interpretivist analytic process guided data evaluation, synthesis, and description of meta-themes. RESULTS: Ninety-eight studies were included (80 quantitative, 12 qualitative, 6 mixed-methods). OA education was heterogeneous in content and delivery. Outcome measures varied, with poor distinction among knowledge, beliefs, and behavior constructs. Trends toward short-term knowledge improvement were observed, but there were no clear trends in beliefs or behavior change. Intrinsic factors (eg, pre-existing beliefs) and extrinsic factors (eg, socioeconomic factors) appeared to influence change. Three meta-themes described how and why changes may occur: (i) engagement: how individuals relate with education content and delivery; (ii) embodiment: the role of experiential factors in learning, and (iii) empowerment: the level of agency education generates. CONCLUSION: Beyond the provision of information and instruction, OA education is a complex, relational process influenced by multidimensional factors. This review identifies potentially important strategies at individual, interpersonal, and community levels to support the design and delivery of engaging education that promotes holistic, embodied learning and facilitates meaningful, empowering change.
RÉSUMÉ
INTRODUCTION: Acromial and scapular spine stress fractures are common complications post reverse shoulder arthroplasty. A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical outcomes of conservatively treated acromial and scapular spine stress fractures post reverse shoulder arthroplasty in comparison to nonfracture control. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science were searched on September 9, 2022, using various terms related to fracture, acromion, scapula, and reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Meta-analysis using a random effects model was performed on common outcome scores. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tools for case-controlled studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed for imputed standard deviations and studies with <20 participants. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with a total of 339 fracture and 3142 control patients were included in the systematic review. Meta-analysis was performed on 12 studies assessing active forward flexion, abduction, external rotation, Constant-Murley score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, pain score, Simple Shoulder Test, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Fracture patients experienced significantly poorer functional outcome compared with control patients when the fractures were managed conservatively. Levy III fractures tend to experience worse outcomes. Pain score did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the fracture and nonfracture cohort. DISCUSSION: Currently, literature regarding surgical management is lacking, partially because of a dearth of high-quality literature but also hindered by a lack of standardized techniques. This review was limited by inclusion of studies of low evidence, small sample sizes, and inconsistency in outcome measurement and follow-up period. Overall, patients with acromial and scapular spine stress fractures treated conservatively are expected to have reduced shoulder function compared to nonfracture patients, with the spine of scapula fracture patients suffering the poorest outcomes. Future studies should aim to use the same sets of outcomes parameters to assess the patients at fixed time intervals and report outcomes stratified by Levy classification. This will enable interinstitutional collaboration and pooling of results.