Primary care-based models of care for osteoarthritis; a scoping review

Barriers and enablers to the management of osteoarthritis in primary care in Ireland from the perspective of healthcare professionals and individuals with osteoarthritis: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

OBJECTIVES

To explore the barriers and enablers to providing and receiving primary care for osteoarthritis (OA) in Ireland from the perspectives of primary care healthcare professionals (HCPs) and individuals with OA.

DESIGN

Descriptive qualitative study incorporating an inductive thematic analysis to identify key barrier and enabler themes and subsequent deductive mapping to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

SETTING

Primary care in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

HCPs, including 6 general practitioners, 5 physiotherapists, 1 occupational therapist and 1 practice nurse, and 13 individuals with OA were interviewed.

RESULTS

Identified barriers and enablers related to nine domains of the TDF. Key barriers identified by HCPs included limited and delayed access to multidisciplinary primary care services, lack of integrated care pathways specific to OA and insufficient training in musculoskeletal conditions including OA. Individuals with OA also reported poor access to health services due to long waiting lists, lack of education on OA and feelings of not being taken seriously by HCPs. There is a need for targeted HCP education and training to address the identified knowledge, skills and confidence gaps in communication, diagnosis and evidence-based management of OA. Improved management of OA through system-level changes, including integrated care pathways with multidisciplinary services to better support individuals with OA in the community, is required.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified several barriers and enablers to the management of OA. These findings highlight areas to be targeted by future interventions aimed at improving the management of OA in primary care.

Large language models' performances regarding common patient questions about osteoarthritis: A comparative analysis of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, and Perplexity

BACKGROUND

Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained much attention and, in part, have replaced common search engines as a popular channel for obtaining information due to their contextually relevant responses. Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common topic in skeletal muscle disorders, and patients often seek information about it online. Our study evaluated the ability of 3 LLMs (ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, and Perplexity) to accurately answer common OA-related queries.

METHODS

We defined 6 themes (pathogenesis, risk factors, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment and prevention, and prognosis) based on a generalization of 25 frequently asked questions about OA. Three consultant-level orthopedic specialists independently rated the LLMs' replies on a 4-point accuracy scale. The final ratings for each response were determined using a majority consensus approach. Responses classified as "satisfactory" were evaluated for comprehensiveness on a 5-point scale.

RESULTS

ChatGPT-4.0 demonstrated superior accuracy, with 64% of responses rated as "excellent", compared to 40% for ChatGPT-3.5 and 28% for Perplexity (Pearson's chi-squared test with Fisher's exact test, all p < 0.001). All 3 LLM-chatbots had high mean comprehensiveness ratings (Perplexity = 3.88; ChatGPT-4.0 = 4.56; ChatGPT-3.5 = 3.96, out of a maximum score of 5). The LLM-chatbots performed reliably across domains, except for "treatment and prevention" However, ChatGPT-4.0 still outperformed ChatGPT-3.5 and Perplexity, garnering 53.8% "excellent" ratings (Pearson's chi-squared test with Fisher's exact test, all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings underscore the potential of LLMs, specifically ChatGPT-4.0 and Perplexity, to deliver accurate and thorough responses to OA-related queries. Targeted correction of specific misconceptions to improve the accuracy of LLMs remains crucial.

Building the OAChangeMap to Improve the Service Delivery of the New South Wales Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program: A Worked Example of Using a Codesign Framework

OBJECTIVE

The Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program (OACCP) has been implemented in Australian public hospitals to deliver best evidence osteoarthritis (OA) care. It is important to ensure that the OACCP continues to deliver evidence-based OA care as intended. We aimed to identify barriers and enablers to delivering the OACCP, prioritize the barriers, and generate strategies to address them.

METHODS

This study provides a worked example of a seven-step theory-informed codesign framework. We invited OACCP coordinators to participate in semistructured interviews (analyzed thematically) and complete a questionnaire to identify barriers and enablers to delivery of the OACCP. We then invited a broader group of stakeholders (OACCP coordinators, health managers, policy makers, consumers, and researchers) to prioritize the barriers via a short survey (survey 2). We held five codesign workshops in which we mapped the priority barriers to the Theoretical Domains Framework and developed strategies to address them.

RESULTS

Sixteen coordinators were interviewed, and the main barriers identified were as follows: (1) patients often have beliefs that are inconsistent with best evidence care, (2) there are aspects of clinical care that are not delivered optimally, and (3) system-level factors are a barrier to optimal patient care and sustainability of the OACCP. We codesigned a plan for action with patient educational materials, shared decision-making tools, and health professional education and training.

CONCLUSION

Our worked example of codesign used a theory-based, data-driven approach with key stakeholders, identified and prioritized barriers to the delivery of the OACCP, acknowledged enablers, and generated a plan for feasible strategies to improve the program.

Use of Implementation Strategies to Promote the Uptake of Knee Osteoarthritis Practice Guidelines and Improve Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Translation of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to practice remains suboptimal. The primary purpose of this systematic review was to describe the use of implementation strategies to promote KOA CPG-recommended care.

METHODS

Medline (via PubMed), Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 23, 2023, and the search was subsequently updated and expanded on January 16, 2024. Implementation strategies were mapped per the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care criteria. The review was registered prospectively (PROSPERO identifier: CRD42023402383).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included in the final review. All (100% [n = 4]) studies that included the domains of "provide interactive assistance," "train and educate stakeholders" (89% [n = 16]), "engage consumers" (87% [n = 13]), and "support clinicians" (79% [n = 11]) showed a change to provider adherence. Studies that showed a change to disability included the domains of "train and educate stakeholders," "engage consumers," and "adapt and tailor to context." Studies that used the domains "train and educate stakeholders," "engage consumers," and "support clinicians" showed a change in pain and quality of life. Most studies had a low to moderate RoB.

CONCLUSION

Implementation strategies have the potential to impact clinician uptake of CPGs and patient-reported outcomes. The implementation context, using an active learning strategy with a patient partner, restructuring funding models, and integrating taxonomies to tailor multifaceted strategies should be prioritized. Further experimental research is recommended to determine which implementation strategies are most effective.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of an exercise and education programme for osteoarthritis: a qualitative study using the consolidated framework for implementation research

Targeted efforts to better understand the barriers and facilitators of stakeholders and healthcare settings to implementation of exercise and education self-management programmes for osteoarthritis (OA) are needed. This study aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D), a supervised group guideline-based OA programme, across Irish public and private healthcare settings. Interviews with 10 physiotherapists (PTs; 8 public) and 9 people with hip and knee OA (PwOA; 4 public) were coded by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs in a case memo (summary, rationale, quotes). The strong positive/negative implementation determinants were identified collaboratively by rating the valence and strength of CFIR constructs on implementation. Across public and private settings, PTs and PwOA strongly perceived GLA:D Ireland as evidence-based, with easily accessible education and modifiable marketing/training materials that meet participants' needs, improve skills/confidence and address exercise beliefs/expectations. Despite difficulties in scheduling sessions (e.g., work/caring responsibilities), PTs in public and private settings perceived advantages to implementation over current clinical practice (e.g., shortens waiting lists). Only PTs in public settings reported limited availability of internal/external funding, inappropriate space, marketing/training tools, and inadequate staffing. Across public and private settings, PwOA reported adaptability, appropriate space/equipment and coaching/supervision, autonomy, and social support as facilitators. Flexible training and tailored education for stakeholders and healthcare settings on guideline-based OA management may promote implementation. Additional support on organising (e.g., scheduling clinical time), planning (e.g., securing appropriate space, marketing/training tools), and funding (e.g., accessing dedicated internal/external grants) may strengthen implementation across public settings.

Longer-term quality of care, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of implementing a model of care for osteoarthritis: A cluster-randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the quality of care, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness over 12 months after implementing a structured model of care for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) in primary healthcare as compared to usual care.

DESIGN

In this pragmatic cluster-randomized, controlled trial with a stepped-wedge cohort design, we recruited 40 general practitioners (GPs), 37 physiotherapists (PTs), and 393 patients with symptomatic hip or knee OA from six municipalities (clusters) in Norway. The model included the delivery of a 3-hour patient education and 8-12 weeks individually tailored exercise programs, and interactive workshops for GPs and PTs. At 12 months, the patient-reported quality of care was assessed by the OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire (16 items, pass rate 0-100%, 100%=best). Costs were obtained from patient-reported and national register data. Cost-effectiveness at the healthcare perspective was evaluated using incremental net monetary benefit (INMB).

RESULTS

Of 393 patients, 109 were recruited during the control periods (control group) and 284 were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). At 12 months the intervention group reported statistically significant higher quality of care compared to the control group (59% vs. 40%; mean difference: 17.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.1, 24.0)). Cost-effectiveness analyses showed that the model of care resulted in quality-adjusted life-years gained and cost-savings compared to usual care with mean INMB €2020 (95% CI 611, 3492) over 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that implementing the model of care for OA in primary healthcare, improved quality of care and showed cost-effectiveness over 12 months compared to usual care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02333656.