A survey of patient and medical professional perspectives on implementing osteoarthritis management programs for hip and knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Strategies are needed to improve referral into, and uptake of, osteoarthritis (OA) management programs. This survey investigated and compared patients' and medical professionals' views around hip and knee OA management and factors impacting implementation of an osteoarthritis management program. METHODS: As part of a mixed-methods program of research, patients with hip or knee OA and medical professionals routinely involved in the management of OA, were invited to complete a comprehensive online survey. All data were analysed descriptively or using chi squared tests. Survey findings for factors perceived to impact implementation of an OA management programme were triangulated with previously reported qualitative data. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (38 females, 15 males) and 32 medical professionals (orthopaedic surgeons, sports physicians, rehabilitation physicians, rheumatologists and general practitioners) completed the survey. Twenty-eight patients (53%) had prior participation in the OA management programme (GLA:D® ) and 19 medical professionals (59%) had previously referred patients to the programme. Of the participants with prior exposure, 21 patients (75%) and 15 medical professionals (79%) agreed the programme was beneficial. A higher proportion of medical professionals, compared to patients, believed weight loss (100% vs. 67%), injection therapy (50% vs. 21%), hip replacement (100% vs. 62%) and knee replacement (97% vs. 62%) were effective treatments, with no differences for all other treatments. The barriers and enablers identified for referral into, and participation in, an OA management programme mostly aligned to factors identified in previous related qualitative research. Divergent factors in the survey included patients concerns about doing exercise-therapy with 81% (higher than expected) not reporting any concerns about exercising, and 19% (lower than expected) concerned about their OA joint, such as making their pain worse. CONCLUSIONS: This study has extended our understanding of barriers and enablers for referral into, and participation in, an OA management programme with a lower than expected number of patients being concerned about exercising due to their OA joint. Patients and medical professionals had positive views relating to the quality of the programme delivery, patient satisfaction and programme effectiveness. Medical professionals were more likely than patients to consider weight loss, injections and joint replacement as effective treatment options.

Barriers, enablers and acceptability of home-based care following elective total knee or hip replacement at a private hospital: A qualitative study of patient and caregiver perspectives.

BACKGROUND: To facilitate implementation of home-based care following an elective total knee or hip replacement in a private hospital, we explored patient and caregiver barriers and enablers and components of care that may increase its acceptability. METHOD: Thirty-one patients (mean age 71 years, 77% female) and 14 caregivers (mean age 69 years, 57% female) were interviewed. All themes were developed using thematic analysis, then categorised as barriers or enablers to uptake of home-based care or acceptable components of care. Barrier and enabler themes were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: Eight themes emerged as barriers or enablers: feeling unsafe versus confident; caregivers' willingness to provide support and patients' unwillingness to seek help; less support and opportunity to rest; positive feelings about home over the hospital; certainty about anticipated recovery; trusting specialist advice over family and friends; length of hospital stay; paying for health insurance. Five themes emerged as acceptable components: home visits prior to discharge; specific information about recovery at home; one-to-one physiotherapy and occupational therapy perceived as first-line care; medical, nursing and a 24/7 direct-line perceived as second-line care for complications; no one-size-fits-all model for domestic support. Theoretical domains relating to barriers included emotion (e.g., feeling unsafe), environmental context and resources (e.g., perceived lack of physiotherapy) and beliefs about consequences (e.g., unwillingness to burden their caregiver). Theoretical domains relating to enablers included beliefs about capabilities (e.g., feeling strong), skills (e.g., practising stairs), procedural knowledge (e.g., receiving advice about early mobility) and social influences (e.g., caregivers' willingness to provide support). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors, such as feeling unsafe and caregivers' willingness to provide support, may influence implementation of home-based care from the perspectives of privately insured patients and caregivers. Our findings provide insights to inform design of suitable home-based care following joint replacement in a private setting.

Exploring views of orthopaedic surgeons, rheumatologists and general practitioners about osteoarthritis management.

BACKGROUND: Delivery of recommended treatments for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) is known to be discordant with guideline recommendations. However, professional views related to OA management across medical and surgical disciplines are not well understood. The aim of this study was to explore the views of medical professionals about management of hip and knee OA. METHODS: Qualitative study. Semistructured individual interviews were conducted with orthopaedic surgeons, rheumatologists and general practitioners routinely involved in the management of OA. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, member-checked, coded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Fifteen medical professionals were interviewed. Three main themes were: (i) recognition of the importance of nonsurgical management of hip and knee OA, focussed on self-management, exercise-therapy, weight management and analgesia; (ii) joint replacement being considered the 'last resort' for end stage disease not responding to nonsurgical management; and (iii) determination of management 'success' through patient perceptions was more common than the use of validated instruments. Views on management broadly converged across disciplines, except for the role of joint replacement, considered an adjunct in the overall management of OA by rheumatologists and as a definitive cure by orthopaedic surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Aligning with current guidelines, medical professionals recognised the importance of nonsurgical management focussed on exercise-therapy for hip and knee OA, and concurred that joint replacement surgery should be a last resort. A focus on patient education was less prominent, which along with implementation of validated outcome measures in routine medical practice, may require greater health system support.

Barriers and enablers to uptake of a contemporary guideline-based management program for hip and knee osteoarthritis: A qualitative study.

Objective: To explore barriers and enablers for referral to, and participation in, a contemporary guideline-based osteoarthritis management program - Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D Australia). Design: A qualitative design was used, involving semi-structured interviews with patients with osteoarthritis and medical professionals. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, coded and thematically analysed. Barrier and enabler themes were mapped to the theoretical domains framework and used to inform the development of recommendations for improving uptake of guideline-based osteoarthritis management programs. Results: Twenty patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis and 15 medical professionals (5 general practitioners, 4 rheumatologists, 6 orthopaedic surgeons) were included. Across both groups, three themes emerged as barriers (program access; misinformation about osteoarthritis; patient and program factors), one theme emerged as a barrier and enabler (health professional trust, feedback and advice), and two themes emerged as enablers (opportunity to achieve positive outcomes and potentially avoid joint replacement surgery; better program promotion, patient and health professional education, and efficient referral processes). Conclusions: Optimising uptake of guideline-based osteoarthritis management programs requires improved reimbursement models, and better promotion and educational initiatives for patients and medical professionals. A particular focus of education should include dispelling misinformation about osteoarthritis, and highlighting the safety and value of physiotherapist delivered exercise-therapy.