Health systems strengthening to arrest the global disability burden: empirical development of prioritised components for a global strategy for improving musculoskeletal health

A quantitative comparison between the essential medicines for rheumatic diseases in children and young people in Africa and the WHO model list

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organisation Essential Medicines List (WHO EML) guides National Essential Medicines Lists and Standard Treatment Guidelines for clearly identified disease priorities especially in low- and middle-income countries. This study compares the degree to which the basket of medicines recommended for rheumatic diseases in children and young people in National Essential Medicines Lists of countries in the WHO Africa region, corresponds to the 2021 WHO EML and WHO EML for children, as a proxy of availability.

METHODS

An online search of the WHO medicines and health technology portal, the Health Ministry websites of the 54 African countries, PUBMED and Google Scholar, with search terms for 'National Essential Medicines List', AND/OR 'standard treatment guidelines' AND/OR 'Lista Nacional de Medicamentos Essenciais' AND/ OR 'Liste Nationale de Medicaments Essentiels' AND Africa AND/OR < Name of African country > was conducted. The number of medicines on the national lists were compared according to a predefined template of medicines; and the percentage similarity calculated. Descriptive statistics were derived using STATA.

RESULTS

Forty-seven countries in the WHO Africa region have developed a National Essential Medicines List. Eleven countries do not have any medicines listed for rheumatic diseases. The majority of countries had less than or equal to 50% similarity with the WHO EML for rheumatic disease in children and young people, median 3 medicines (IQR 1- 4). The most common medicines on the national lists from Africa were methotrexate, sulfasalazine and azathioprine, with etanercept available in 6 countries. Seven countries had only one medicine, acetylsalicylic acid listed in the section 'Juvenile Joint diseases'. A multiple linear regression model for the predictors of the number of medicines on the national lists established that 20% of the variability was predicted by health expenditure per capita, socio-demographic index and the availability of rheumatology services (adult and/or paediatric) p = 0.006, with socio-demographic index (p = 0.035, 95% CI 0.64-16.16) and the availability of rheumatology services (p = 0.033, 95% CI 0.13 - 2.90) significant.

CONCLUSION

Four countries (8.5%) in Africa have updated their National Essential Medicines Lists to reflect adequate care for children and young people with rheumatic diseases. Moving forward, efforts should focus on aligning available medicines with the WHO EML, and strengthening healthcare policy for rheumatology and pharmaceutical services, for affordable access to care and medicines.

Total Knee Arthroplasty Versus Education and Exercise for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We estimate the treatment effect of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) versus an education and exercise (Edu+Ex) program on pain, function, and quality of life outcomes 3 and 12 months after treatment initiation for knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Patients with knee OA who had undergone TKA were matched on a 1:1 ratio with participants in an Edu+Ex program based on a propensity score fitted to a range of pretreatment covariates. After matching, between-group differences in improvement (the treatment effect) in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 12-item version (0, worst to 100, best) pain, function, and quality of life from baseline to 3 and 12 months were estimated using linear mixed models, adjusting for unbalanced covariates, if any, after matching.

RESULTS

The matched sample consisted of 522 patients (Edu+Ex, n = 261; TKA, n = 261) who were balanced on all pretreatment characteristics. At 12-month follow-up, TKA resulted in significantly greater improvements in pain (mean difference [MD] 22.8; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 19.7-25.8), function (MD 21.2; 95% CI 17.7-24.4), and quality of life (MD 18.3; 15.0-21.6). Even so, at least one-third of patients receiving Edu+Ex had a clinically meaningful improvement in outcomes at 12 months compared with 75% of patients with TKA.

CONCLUSION

TKA is associated with greater improvements in pain, function, and quality of life, but these findings also suggest that Edu+Ex may be a viable alternative to TKA in a meaningful proportion of patients, which may reduce overall TKA need. Confirmatory trials are needed.

Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Education and Exercise: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of 266 Patients Who Have Hip Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis (OA) is a major health system cost. Education and exercise (Edu + Ex) programs may reduce the number of THAs needed, but supporting data are limited. This study aimed to estimate the treatment effect of THA versus Edu + Ex on pain, function, and quality of life outcomes 3 and 12 months after treatment initiation for hip OA.

METHODS

Patients who had hip OA who underwent THA or an Edu + Ex program were included in this propensity-matched study. In 778 patients (Edu + Ex, n = 303; THA, n = 475), propensity scores were based on pretreatment characteristics, and patients were matched on a 1:1 ratio. Between-group treatment effects (pain, function, and quality of life) were estimated as the mean difference (MD) in change from pretreatment to 3-month and 12-month follow-up using linear mixed models.

RESULTS

The matched sample consisted of 266 patients (Edu + Ex, n = 133; THA, n = 133) who were balanced on all pretreatment characteristics except opioid use. At 12-month follow-up, THA resulted in significantly greater improvements in pain (MD 35.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] 31.4 to 39.4), function (MD 30.5; 95% CI 26.3 to 34.7), and quality of life (MD 33.6; 95% CI 28.8 to 38.4). Between 17% and 30% of patients receiving Edu + Ex experienced a surgical threshold for clinically meaningful improvement in outcomes, compared to 84% and 90% of THA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A THA provides greater improvements in pain, function, and quality of life. A notable proportion of Edu + Ex patients had clinically meaningful improvements, suggesting Edu + Ex may result in THA deferral in some patients, but confirmatory trials are needed.

Defining the role of sport and exercise physicians: the experience of different referrer types in New Zealand

The aim of this study was to analyse the reasons health professionals refer to sport and exercise physicians (SEPs) and to define what service gap the specialty fills. This was a qualitative study design using thematic analysis. Online focus group interviews consisting of 4-6 participants in each group were conducted separately with physiotherapists, emergency clinicians, general practitioners and orthopaedic surgeons practising in New Zealand. Thematic analysis of the focus group interviews was then used for the identification of common themes around referral tendencies towards SEPs. Three primary themes were identified relating to referrals towards SEPs: (1) role utilisation of SEPs, (2) collaboration and (3) accessibility. SEPs are viewed as experts in the assessment, investigation and diagnosis of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, including some which might traditionally be viewed as surgical diagnoses. Some confusion or lack of understanding exists regarding the range of conditions that SEPs can treat and manage, with some referrers assuming that SEPs only treat sport-related injuries. SEPs are often used alongside other specialist practitioners in the management of patients with MSK conditions. This requires collaboration with other health professionals who also treat MSK conditions to ensure the best patient outcome. A common feeling towards SEPs is they are easily accessible compared with other potential health providers who may also treat MSK conditions such as orthopaedic surgeons and general practitioners, and that SEPs provide sound management plans and access to investigations such as MRI, in a timely fashion.

Musculoskeletal health: an ecological study assessing disease burden and research funding

Background

Exacerbated by an aging population, musculoskeletal diseases are a chronic and growing problem in the United States that impose significant health and economic burdens. The objective of this study was to analyze the correlation between the burden of diseases and the federal funds assigned to health-related research through the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Methods

An ecological study design was used to examine the relationship between NIH research funding and disease burden for 60 disease categories. We used the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2019 to measure disease burden and the NIH Research, Condition, and Disease Categories (RCDC) data to identify 60 disease categories aligned with available GBD data. NIH funding data was obtained from the RCDC system and the NIH Office of Budget. Using linear regression models, we observed that musculoskeletal diseases were among the most underfunded (i.e., negative residuals from the model) with respect to disease burden.

Findings

Musculoskeletal diseases were underfunded, with neck pain being the most underfunded at only 0.83% of expected funding. Low back pain, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis were also underfunded at 13.88%, 35.08%, and 66.26%, respectively. Musculoskeletal diseases were the leading cause of years lived with disability and the third leading cause in terms of prevalence and disability-adjusted life years. Despite the increasing burden of these diseases, the allocation of NIH funding to the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS) has remained low compared to other institutes.

Interpretation

Despite the increasing health burden and economic cost of $980 billion annually, the allocation of NIH funding to the NIAMS has remained low compared to other institutes. These findings suggest that the NIH may need to reassess its allocation of research funding to align with the current health challenges of our country. Furthermore, these clinically relevant observations highlight the need to increase research funding for musculoskeletal diseases and improve their prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.

Funding

No funding.

The OARSI Joint Effort Initiative: Priorities for osteoarthritis management program implementation and research 2024-2028

Objective

The Joint Effort Initiative (JEI) is an international collaboration of clinicians, researchers, and consumer organisations with a shared vision of improving the implementation of osteoarthritis management programs (OAMPs). This study aimed to identify JEI's future priorities and guide direction.

Design

A two-part international survey to prioritise topics of importance to our membership and research stakeholders. Survey one presented a list of 40 topics under 5 themes. Consenting participants were asked to choose their top three topics in each theme. A short list of 25 topics was presented in survey two. Participants were asked to rank the importance (100-point NRS scale, 100 ​= ​highest priority). Response frequency (median, IQR) was used to rank the top priorities by theme.

Results

Ninety-five participants completed survey one (61% female, 48% clinicians) and 57 completed survey two. The top ranked topic/s were:i. Promotion and advocacy: support training for health professionals (median 85, IQR 24).ii. Education and training: incorporating behaviour change into OAMPs (80, 16), advanced OA skills (80, 30), and integration of OA education into clinical training (80, 36).iii. Improving OAMPs delivery: regular updates on changes to best-evidence OA care (84, 24).iv. Future research: improve uptake of exercise, physical activity, and weight-loss (89, 16).v. Enhancing relationships, alliances, and shared knowledge: promote research collaborations (81, 30), share challenges and opportunities for OAMP implementation (80, 23).

Conclusions

These topics will set the JEI's research and collaboration agenda for the next 5 years and stimulate ideas for others working in the field.

'It's about time'. Dissemination and evaluation of a global health systems strengthening roadmap for musculoskeletal health - insights and future directions

Actions towards the health-related Sustainable Development Goal 3.4 typically focus on non-communicable diseases (NCDs) associated with premature mortality, with less emphasis on NCDs associated with disability, such as musculoskeletal conditions-the leading contributor to the global burden of disability. Can systems strengthening priorities for an underprioritised NCD be codesigned, disseminated and evaluated? A 'roadmap' for strengthening global health systems for improved musculoskeletal health was launched in 2021. In this practice paper, we outline dissemination efforts for this Roadmap and insights on evaluating its reach, user experience and early adoption. A global network of 22 dissemination partners was established to drive dissemination efforts, focussing on Africa, Asia and Latin America, each supported with a suite of dissemination assets. Within a 6-month evaluation window, 52 Twitter posts were distributed, 2195 visitors from 109 countries accessed the online multilingual Roadmap and 138 downloads of the Roadmap per month were recorded. Among 254 end users who answered a user-experience survey, respondents 'agreed' or 'strongly agreed' the Roadmap was valuable (88.3%), credible (91.2%), useful (90.1%) and usable (85.4%). Most (77.8%) agreed or strongly agreed they would adopt the Roadmap in some way. Collection of real-world adoption case studies allowed unique insights into adoption practices in different contexts, settings and health system levels. Diversity in adoption examples suggests that the Roadmap has value and adoption potential at multiple touchpoints within health systems globally. With resourcing, harnessing an engaged global community and establishing a global network of partners, a systems strengthening tool can be cocreated, disseminated and formatively evaluated.

Applying the behavioural change wheel to guide the implementation of a biopsychosocial approach to musculoskeletal pain care

Achieving high value, biopsychosocial pain care can be complex, involving multiple stakeholders working synergistically to support the implementation of quality care. In order to empower healthcare professionals to assess, identify and analyse biopsychosocial factors contributing to musculoskeletal pain, and describe what changes are needed in the whole-of-system to navigate this complexity, we aimed to: (1) map established barriers and enablers influencing healthcare professionals' adoption of a biopsychosocial approach to musculoskeletal pain against behaviour change frameworks; and (2) identify behaviour change techniques to facilitate and support the adoption and improve pain education. A five-step process informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) was undertaken: (i) from a recently published qualitative evidence synthesis, barriers and enablers were mapped onto the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) using "best fit" framework synthesis; (ii) relevant stakeholder groups involved in the whole-of-health were identified as audiences for potential interventions; (iii) possible intervention functions were considered based on the Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, Equity criteria; (iv) a conceptual model was synthesised to understand the behavioural determinants underpinning biopsychosocial pain care; (v) behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to improve adoption were identified. Barriers and enablers mapped onto 5/6 components of the COM-B model and 12/15 domains on the TDF. Multi-stakeholder groups including healthcare professionals, educators, workplace managers, guideline developers and policymakers were identified as target audiences for behavioural interventions, specifically education, training, environmental restructuring, modelling and enablement. A framework was derived with six BCTs identified from the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy (version 1). Adoption of a biopsychosocial approach to musculoskeletal pain involves a complex set of behavioural determinants, relevant across multiple audiences, reflecting the importance of a whole-of-system approach to musculoskeletal health. We proposed a worked example on how to operationalise the framework and apply the BCTs. Evidence-informed strategies are recommended to empower healthcare professionals to assess, identify and analyse biopsychosocial factors, as well as targeted interventions relevant to various stakeholders. These strategies can help to strengthen a whole-of-system adoption of a biopsychosocial approach to pain care.

SPINE20 recommendations 2022: spine care-working together to recover stronger

PURPOSE

Globally, spine disorders are the leading cause of disability, affecting more than half a billion individuals. However, less than 50% of G20 countries specifically identify spine health within their public policy priorities. Therefore, it is crucial to raise awareness among policy makers of the disabling effect of spine disorders and their impact on the economic welfare of G20 nations. In 2019, SPINE20 was established as the leading advocacy group to bring global attention to spine disorders.

METHODS

Recommendations were developed through two Delphi methods with international and multi-professional panels.

RESULTS

In 2022, seven recommendations were delivered to the leaders of G20 countries, urging them to: Develop action plans to provide universal access to evidence-based spine care that incorporates the needs of minorities and vulnerable populations. Invest in the development of sustainable human resource capacity, through multisectoral and inter-professional competency-based education and training to promote evidence-based approaches to spine care, and to build an appropriate healthcare working environment that optimizes the delivery of safe health services. Develop policies using the best available evidence to properly manage spine disorders and to prolong functional healthy life expectancy in the era of an aging population. Create a competent workforce and improve the healthcare infrastructure/facilities including equipment to provide evidence-based inter-professional rehabilitation services to patients with spinal cord injury throughout their continuum of care. Build collaborative and innovative translational research capacity within national, regional, and global healthcare systems for state-of-the-art and cost-effective spine care across the healthcare continuum ensuring equality, diversity, and inclusion of all stakeholders. Develop international consensus statements on patient outcomes and how they can be used to define and develop pathways for value-based care. Recognize that intervening on determinants of health including physical activity, nutrition, physical and psychosocial workplace environment, and smoking-free lifestyle can reduce the burden of spine disabilities and improve the health status and wellness of the population. At the third SPINE20 summit 2022 which took place in Bali, Indonesia, in August 2022, 17 associations endorsed its recommendations.

CONCLUSION

SPINE20 advocacy efforts focus on developing public policy recommendations to improve the health, welfare, and wellness of all who suffer from spinal pain and disability. We propose that focusing on facilitating access to systems that prioritize value-based care delivered by a competent healthcare workforce will reduce disability and improve the productivity of the G20 nations.

"Listen to me, learn from me": a priority setting partnership for shaping interdisciplinary pain training to strengthen chronic pain care

ABSTRACT

What are the care-seeking priorities of people living with chronic pain and carers and how can these shape interdisciplinary workforce training to improve high-value pain care? Phase 1: Australian people living with chronic pain (n = 206; 90% female) and carers (n = 10; 40% female) described their pain care priorities (eDelphi, round 1). A coding framework was inductively derived from 842 pain care priorities (9 categories, 52 priorities), including validation; communication; multidisciplinary approaches; holistic care; partnerships; practitioner knowledge; self-management; medicines; and diagnosis. Phase 2: In eDelphi round 2, panellists (n = 170; valid responses) rated the importance (1 = less important; 9 = more important) of the represented framework. In parallel, cross-discipline health professionals (n = 267; 75% female) rated the importance of these same priorities. Applying the RAND-UCLA method (panel medians: 1-3: "not important," 4-6: "equivocal," or 7-9: "important"), "important" items were retained where the panel median score was >7 with panel agreement ≥70%, with 44 items (84.6%) retained. Specific workforce training targets included the following: empathic validation; effective, respectful, safe communication; and ensuring genuine partnerships in coplanning personalised care. Panellists and health professionals agreed or strongly agreed (95.7% and 95.2%, respectively) that this framework meaningfully reflected the importance in care seeking for pain. More than 74% of health professionals were fairly or extremely confident in their ability to support care priorities for 6 of 9 categories (66.7%). Phase 3: An interdisciplinary panel (n = 5) mapped an existing foundation-level workforce training program against the framework, identifying gaps and training targets. Recommendations were determined for framework adoption to genuinely shape, from a partnership perspective, Australian interdisciplinary pain training.

Context and priorities for health systems strengthening for pain and disability in low- and middle-income countries: a secondary qualitative study and content analysis of health policies

Musculoskeletal (MSK) health impairments contribute substantially to the pain and disability burden in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), yet health systems strengthening (HSS) responses are nascent in these settings. We aimed to explore the contemporary context, framed as challenges and opportunities, for improving population-level prevention and management of MSK health in LMICs using secondary qualitative data from a previous study exploring HSS priorities for MSK health globally and (2) to contextualize these findings through a primary analysis of health policies for integrated management of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in select LMICs. Part 1: 12 transcripts of interviews with LMIC-based key informants (KIs) were inductively analysed. Part 2: systematic content analysis of health policies for integrated care of NCDs where KIs were resident (Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Malaysia, Philippines and South Africa). A thematic framework of LMIC-relevant challenges and opportunities was empirically derived and organized around five meta-themes: (1) MSK health is a low priority; (2) social determinants adversely affect MSK health; (3) healthcare system issues de-prioritize MSK health; (4) economic constraints restrict system capacity to direct and mobilize resources to MSK health; and (5) build research capacity. Twelve policy documents were included, describing explicit foci on cardiovascular disease (100%), diabetes (100%), respiratory conditions (100%) and cancer (89%); none explicitly focused on MSK health. Policy strategies were coded into three categories: (1) general principles for people-centred NCD care, (2) service delivery and (3) system strengthening. Four policies described strategies to address MSK health in some way, mostly related to injury care. Priorities and opportunities for HSS for MSK health identified by KIs aligned with broader strategies targeting NCDs identified in the policies. MSK health is not currently prioritized in NCD health policies among selected LMICs. However, opportunities to address the MSK-attributed disability burden exist through integrating MSK-specific HSS initiatives with initiatives targeting NCDs generally and injury and trauma care.

Quantifying the population burden of musculoskeletal disorders, including impact on sickness absence: analysis of national Scottish data

Objectives

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) account for the greatest burden of years lived with disability globally. To prevent disability, good-quality services need to be commissioned, appropriate for local need. We analysed data collected systematically from a new musculoskeletal service serving 70% of the population of Scotland to evaluate: age- and sex-specific occurrence; anatomical distribution; and impact and effect on work ability.

Methods

A new centralized telephone-based triage for people with musculoskeletal disorders was set up in Scotland in 2015. Available to most of the population aged >16 years (>3 million people), data were collected systematically into a database detailing: anatomical site, nature of onset, duration, impact/risk (modified STarT score), deprivation level and, for those in employment, sickness absence.

Results

Data were available from 219 314 new callers, 2015–18. Calls were more frequently from women (60%), increased with age until the eighth decade, and 66% reported symptoms that had been present for >6 weeks. Callers were more likely to be living in more deprived areas in each age band between 20 and 64 years and tended to have higher-impact symptoms. The majority (53%) of callers were in employment, and 19% of these were off sick because of their symptoms. Sickness absence was more common among those with highest impact/risk scores from deprived areas with more acute symptoms.

Discussion

Large-scale systematic data collection for MSDs emphasizes the size and impact of the burden among adults aged >16 years. A socio-economic gradient is evident in terms of prevalence and impact of MSDs, particularly for sickness absence.

Disability burden due to musculoskeletal conditions and low back pain in Australia: findings from GBD 2019

BACKGROUND

To report the national prevalence, years lived with disability (YLDs) and attributable risk factors for all musculoskeletal conditions and separately for low back pain (LBP), as well as compare the disability burden related to musculoskeletal with other health conditions in Australia in 2019.

METHODS

Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019 study meta-data on all musculoskeletal conditions and LBP specifically were accessed and aggregated. Counts and age-standardised rates, for both sexes and across all ages, for prevalence, YLDs and attributable risk factors are reported.

RESULTS

In 2019, musculoskeletal conditions were estimated to be the leading cause of YLDs in Australia (20.1%). There were 7,219,894.5 (95% UI: 6,847,113-7,616,567) prevalent cases of musculoskeletal conditions and 685,363 (95% UI: 487,722-921,471) YLDs due to musculoskeletal conditions. There were 2,676,192 (95% UI: 2,339,327-3,061,066) prevalent cases of LBP and 298,624 (95% UI: 209,364-402,395) YLDs due to LBP. LBP was attributed to 44% of YLDs due to musculoskeletal conditions. In 2019, 22.3% and 39.8% of YLDs due to musculoskeletal conditions and LBP, respectively, were attributed to modifiable GBD risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The ongoing high burden due to musculoskeletal conditions impacts Australians across the life course, and in particular females and older Australians. Strategies for integrative and organisational interventions in the Australian healthcare system should support high-value care and address key modifiable risk factors for disability such as smoking, occupational ergonomic factors and obesity.

An investigation of implicit bias about bending and lifting

OBJECTIVES

Previous studies in a high-income country have demonstrated that people with and without low back pain (LBP) have an implicit bias that bending and lifting with a flexed lumbar spine is dangerous. These studies present two key limitations: use of a single group per study; people who recovered from back pain were not studied. Our aims were to evaluate: implicit biases between back posture and safety related to bending and lifting in people who are pain-free, have a history of LBP or have current LBP in a middle-income country, and to explore correlations between implicit and explicit measures within groups.

METHODS

Exploratory cross-sectional study including 174 participants (63 pain-free, 57 with history of LBP and 54 with current LBP). Implicit biases between back posture and safety related to bending and lifting were assessed with the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Participants completed paper-based (Bending Safety Belief [BSB]) and online questionnaires (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia; Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire).

RESULTS

Participants displayed significant implicit bias between images of round-back bending and lifting and words representing "danger" (IATD-SCORE: Pain-free group: 0.56 (IQR=0.31-0.91; 95% CI [0.47, 0.68]); history of LBP group: 0.57 (IQR=0.34-0.84; 95% CI [0.47, 0.67]); current LBP group: 0.56 (IQR=0.24-0.80; 95% CI [0.39, 0.64])). Explicit measures revealed participants hold unhelpful beliefs about the back, perceiving round-back bending and lifting as dangerous (BSBthermometer: Pain-free group: 8 (IQR=7-10; 95% CI [7.5, 8.5]); history of LBP group: 8 (IQR=7-10; 95% CI [7.5, 9.0]); current LBP group: 8.5 (IQR=6.75-10; [7.5, 9.0])). There was no correlation between implicit and explicit measures within the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In a middle-income country, people with and without LBP, and those who recovered from LBP have an implicit bias that round-back bending and lifting is dangerous.

Prevalence of multimorbid degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with knee or hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Musculoskeletal multimorbidity is common and coexisting lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA) has been reported. The aim of this review was to report the prevalence of multimorbid degenerative LSS with knee or hip OA based on clinical and/or imaging case definitions.

Methods

Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL up to May 2021. Studies involving adults with cross-sectional data to estimate the prevalence of co-occurring LSS with knee or hip OA were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. Results were stratified according to index and comorbid condition, and by case definitions (imaging, clinical, and combined).

Results

Ten studies from five countries out of 3891 citations met the inclusion criteria. Sample sizes ranged from 44 to 2,857,999 (median 230) and the mean age in the included studies range from 61 to 73 years (median 66 years). All studies were from secondary care or mixed settings. Nine studies used a combined definition of LSS and one used a clinical definition. Imaging, clinical, and combined case definitions of knee and hip OA were used. The prevalence of multimorbid LSS and knee or hip OA ranged from 0 to 54%, depending on the specified index condition and case definitions used. Six studies each provided prevalence data for index LSS and comorbid knee OA (prevalence range: 5 to 41%) and comorbid hip OA (prevalence range: 2 to 35%). Two studies provided prevalence data for index knee OA and comorbid LSS (prevalence range 17 to 54%). No studies reporting prevalence data for index hip OA and comorbid LSS were found. Few studies used comparable case definitions and all but one study were rated as high risk of bias.

Conclusions

There is evidence that multimorbid LSS with knee or hip OA occurs in people (0 to 54%), although results are based on studies with high risk of bias and surgical populations. Variability in LSS and OA case definitions limit the comparability of studies and prevalence estimates should therefore be interpreted with caution.

Review registration

PROSPERO (CRD42020177759).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05104-3.

Implementation of Best-Evidence Osteoarthritis Care: Perspectives on Challenges for, and Opportunities From, Low and Middle-Income Countries

The "Joint Effort Initiative" (JEI) is an international consortium of clinicians, researchers, and consumers under the auspices of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI). The JEI was formed with a vision to improve the implementation of coordinated programs of best evidence osteoarthritis care globally. To better understand some of the issues around osteoarthritis care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the JEI invited clinician researcher representatives from South Africa, Brazil, and Nepal to discuss their perspectives on challenges and opportunities to implementing best-evidence osteoarthritis care at the OARSI World Pre-Congress Workshop. We summarize and discuss the main themes of the presentations in this paper. The challenges to implementing evidence-based osteoarthritis care identified in LMICs include health inequities, unaffordability of osteoarthritis management and the failure to recognize osteoarthritis as an important disease. Fragmented healthcare services and a lack of health professional knowledge and skills are also important factors affecting osteoarthritis care in LMICs. We discuss considerations for developing strategies to improve osteoarthritis care in LMICs. Existing opportunities may be leveraged to facilitate the implementation of best-evidence osteoarthritis care. We also discuss strategies to support the implementation, such as the provision of high-quality healthcare professional and consumer education, and systemic healthcare reforms.

The need for adaptable global guidance in health systems strengthening for musculoskeletal health: a qualitative study of international key informants

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, MSK pain and MSK injury/trauma are the largest contributors to the global burden of disability, yet global guidance to arrest the rising disability burden is lacking. We aimed to explore contemporary context, challenges and opportunities at a global level and relevant to health systems strengthening for MSK health, as identified by international key informants (KIs) to inform a global MSK health strategic response.

METHODS

An in-depth qualitative study was undertaken with international KIs, purposively sampled across high-income and low and middle-income countries (LMICs). KIs identified as representatives of peak global and international organisations (clinical/professional, advocacy, national government and the World Health Organization), thought leaders, and people with lived experience in advocacy roles. Verbatim transcripts of individual semi-structured interviews were analysed inductively using a grounded theory method. Data were organised into categories describing 1) contemporary context; 2) goals; 3) guiding principles; 4) accelerators for action; and 5) strategic priority areas (pillars), to build a data-driven logic model. Here, we report on categories 1-4 of the logic model.

RESULTS

Thirty-one KIs from 20 countries (40% LMICs) affiliated with 25 organisations participated. Six themes described contemporary context (category 1): 1) MSK health is afforded relatively lower priority status compared with other health conditions and is poorly legitimised; 2) improving MSK health is more than just healthcare; 3) global guidance for country-level system strengthening is needed; 4) impact of COVID-19 on MSK health; 5) multiple inequities associated with MSK health; and 6) complexity in health service delivery for MSK health. Five guiding principles (category 3) focussed on adaptability; inclusiveness through co-design; prevention and reducing disability; a lifecourse approach; and equity and value-based care. Goals (category 2) and seven accelerators for action (category 4) were also derived.

CONCLUSION

KIs strongly supported the creation of an adaptable global strategy to catalyse and steward country-level health systems strengthening responses for MSK health. The data-driven logic model provides a blueprint for global agencies and countries to initiate appropriate whole-of-health system reforms to improve population-level prevention and management of MSK health. Contextual considerations about MSK health and accelerators for action should be considered in reform activities.