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

Referral Patterns for People With Musculoskeletal Complaints in General Practice: An Analysis From an Australian Primary Care Database

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to examine referral patterns for people with musculoskeletal complaints presenting to Australian general practitioners (GPs).

METHODS

This longitudinal analysis from the Population Level Analysis Reporting (POLAR) database includes 133,279 patients with low back (≥18 years old) or neck, shoulder, and/or knee (≥45 years old) complaints seen by 4,538 GPs across 269 practices from 2014 through 2018. Referrals to allied health and medical and/or surgical specialists were included. We determined the number of patients with referrals and GPs who made referrals and examined their timing, associations, and trends over time.

RESULTS

A total of 43,666 patients (33%) received and 3,053 GPs (67%) made at least one referral. Most referrals were to allied health (n = 25,830, 19%), followed by surgeons (n = 18,805, 14%). Surgical referrals were higher for knee complaints (n = 6,140, 24%) compared with low back, neck, and shoulder complaints (range 8%-15%). The referral category varied predominantly by body region followed by gender, socioeconomic status, and primary health network. Time to allied health referral ranged between median (interquartile range [IQR]) 14 days (0-125 days) for neck complaints and 56 days (5-177 days) for knee complaints. Surgical referrals occurred sooner for those with knee complaints (15 days, IQR 0-128 days). There was a 2.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9%-2.4%) annual increase in the proportion of allied health referrals and a 1.9% (95% CI 1.6%-2.1%) decrease in surgical referrals across all sites.

CONCLUSION

One-third of patients receive, and two-thirds of GPs make, referrals for musculoskeletal complaints. Understanding the reasons for referral and differences between GPs who refer more and less frequently may identify factors that explain variations in practice.

Key influences on university students' physical activity: a systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework and the COM-B model of human behaviour

BACKGROUND

Physical activity is important for all aspects of health, yet most university students are not active enough to reap these benefits. Understanding the factors that influence physical activity in the context of behaviour change theory is valuable to inform the development of effective evidence-based interventions to increase university students' physical activity. The current systematic review a) identified barriers and facilitators to university students' physical activity, b) mapped these factors to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and COM-B model, and c) ranked the relative importance of TDF domains.

METHODS

Data synthesis included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research published between 01.01.2010-15.03.2023. Four databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus) were searched to identify publications on the barriers/facilitators to university students' physical activity. Data regarding study design and key findings (i.e., participant quotes, qualitative theme descriptions, and survey results) were extracted. Framework analysis was used to code barriers/facilitators to the TDF and COM-B model. Within each TDF domain, thematic analysis was used to group similar barriers/facilitators into descriptive theme labels. TDF domains were ranked by relative importance based on frequency, elaboration, and evidence of mixed barriers/facilitators.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies involving 17,771 participants met the inclusion criteria. Fifty-six barriers and facilitators mapping to twelve TDF domains and the COM-B model were identified as relevant to students' physical activity. Three TDF domains, environmental context and resources (e.g., time constraints), social influences (e.g., exercising with others), and goals (e.g., prioritisation of physical activity) were judged to be of greatest relative importance (identified in > 50% of studies). TDF domains of lower relative importance were intentions, reinforcement, emotion, beliefs about consequences, knowledge, physical skills, beliefs about capabilities, cognitive and interpersonal skills, social/professional role and identity, and behavioural regulation. No barriers/facilitators relating to the TDF domains of memory, attention and decision process, or optimism were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings provide a foundation to enhance the development of theory and evidence informed interventions to support university students' engagement in physical activity. Interventions that include a focus on the TDF domains 'environmental context and resources,' 'social influences,' and 'goals,' hold particular promise for promoting active student lifestyles.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero ID-CRD42021242170.

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 for implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention in community-dwelling older adults: a scoping review

Background

Lifestyle interventions, combining nutrition and exercise, are effective in improving the physical functioning of community-dwelling older adults and preventing healthcare risks due to loss in muscle mass. However, the potential of these types of interventions is not being fully exploited due to insufficient implementation. Having insight into the determinants that could hinder or facilitate the implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention could improve the development of matching implementation strategies and enhance the implementation of such lifestyle interventions. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators for the successful implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention for community-dwelling older adults.

Method

A scoping review was conducted. A literature search was conducted in four electronic databases, and references were checked for additional inclusion. Studies were screened if they met the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators were extracted from the included studies. To validate the results of the literature search, healthcare professionals and community-dwelling older adults were interviewed. Barriers and facilitators were categorized by two researchers according to the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results

The search identified 12,364 studies, and 23 were found eligible for inclusion in the review. Barriers and facilitators for 26 of the 39 constructs of the CFIR were extracted. The interviews with healthcare professionals and older adults yielded six extra barriers and facilitators for implementation, resulting in determinants for 32 of the 39 CFIR constructs. According to literature and healthcare professionals, cosmopolitanism (network with external organizations), patient needs and resources, readiness for implementation, costs, knowledge and beliefs about the intervention, network and communication, and engaging were found to be the most important determinants for implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention.

Conclusion

A broad range of barriers and facilitators across all domains of the CFIR framework emerged in this study. The results of this review reflect on determinants that should be taken into account when planning for the implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention. A further step in the implementation process is the development of implementation strategies aiming at the identified determinants to enhance the implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention in community care.

Multi-level strategies to improve equitable timely person-centred osteoarthritis care for diverse women: qualitative interviews with women and healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Women are more likely to develop osteoarthritis (OA), and have greater OA pain and disability compared with men, but are less likely to receive guideline-recommended management, particularly racialized women. OA care of diverse women, and strategies to improve the quality of their OA care is understudied. The purpose of this study was to explore strategies to overcome barriers of access to OA care for diverse women.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews with key informants and used content analysis to identify themes regarding what constitutes person-centred OA care, barriers of OA care, and strategies to support equitable timely access to person-centred OA care.

RESULTS

We interviewed 27 women who varied by ethno-cultural group (e.g. African or Caribbean Black, Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Pakistani, Caucasian), age, region of Canada, level of education, location of OA and years with OA; and 31 healthcare professionals who varied by profession (e.g. family physician, nurse practitioner, community pharmacist, physio- and occupational therapists, chiropractors, healthcare executives, policy-makers), career stage, region of Canada and type of organization. Participants within and across groups largely agreed on approaches for person-centred OA care across six domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address emotions, manage uncertainty, share decisions and enable self-management. Participants identified 22 barriers of access and 18 strategies to overcome barriers at the patient- (e.g. educational sessions and materials that accommodate cultural norms offered in different languages and formats for persons affected by OA), healthcare professional- (e.g. medical and continuing education on OA and on providing OA care tailored to intersectional factors) and system- (e.g. public health campaigns to raise awareness of OA, and how to prevent and manage it; self-referral to and public funding for therapy, greater number and ethno-cultural diversity of healthcare professionals, healthcare policies that address the needs of diverse women, dedicated inter-professional OA clinics, and a national strategy to coordinate OA care) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This research contributes to a gap in knowledge of how to optimize OA care for disadvantaged groups including diverse women. Ongoing efforts are needed to examine how best to implement these strategies, which will require multi-sector collaboration and must engage diverse women.

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.

Health literacy in individuals with knee pain-a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Low health literacy is associated with worse pain and poorer self-management. This study (1) examined the level of health literacy and associations with lifestyle habits, health status, chronic pain, and radiographic knee osteoarthritis; and (2) explored experiences illuminating health literacy among individuals with knee pain.

METHODS

A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used, including 221 individuals. Health literacy was assessed by HLS-EU-Q16 and eHEALS. The questionnaire included questions on lifestyle habits, health status, and pain distribution. Radiographic knee osteoarthritis was assessed with x-rays. Associations were analysed using logistic regression analyses. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted (n = 19) and analysed with qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

The result showed that 71% reported sufficient health literacy. Higher education, healthy lifestyle habits, better general health, and absence of widespread pain were associated with sufficient health literacy. Experiences regarding health literacy influencing the decision-making process toward a decision on action comprised: (1) searching for information actively or passively; (2) processing of the information included being informed, critical, and interpretive; and (3) taking a stand on the information based on trustfulness and motivation.

CONCLUSION

Seven out of 10 reported sufficient health literacy. Despite this, unhealthy lifestyles were common, suggesting that having sufficient HL is not enough for a behavioural change and the decision-making process, including different phases such as searching, processing, and taking a stand on health information is important to consider. More research on health literacy is needed to gain knowledge of how best to develop health promotion in individuals with knee pain.