Identifying strategies that support equitable person-centred osteoarthritis care for diverse women: content analysis of guidelines

Same patient but different worlds: A state-of-the-art review translating best practice psychosocial care from musculoskeletal care to the orthopaedic context

BACKGROUND

Individuals with chronic musculoskeletal conditions experience persistent pain and disability that has deleterious impacts on physical function, psychological health, social engagement, relationships, and work participation. This impact is greater in people with psychosocial risk factors, and best practice musculoskeletal care recommends a biopsychosocial approach to management. Orthopaedic surgery is often an effective management approach for chronic musculoskeletal conditions, but research has only recently explored the links between differing patient outcomes after orthopaedic surgery and psychosocial risk factors. Implementing biopsychosocial approaches to musculoskeletal care has taken great strides in the primary care setting however, implementation of the biopsychosocial approach in orthopaedic surgery brings complexity as the context changes from primary care to hospital based secondary care. The aim of this review therefore is to explore implementation of psychosocial care in the elective orthopaedic surgery context, informed by evidence in musculoskeletal care.

ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF PSYCHOSOCIAL FACTORS

Several composite screening tools for psychosocial factors or 'yellow flags' are recommended for use in primary care for musculoskeletal conditions alongside a comprehensive patient interview. However, in the orthopaedic surgery context, composite measures have focused on discharge destination, and there is not a universal approach to comprehensive patient interview incorporating a biopsychosocial approach. A range of biopsychosocial approaches to musculoskeletal conditions have been developed for the primary care setting, yet few have been explored in the context of orthopaedic surgery.

IMPLEMENTATION OF PSYCHOSOCIAL CARE

Implementing best practice psychosocial care into the orthopaedic context has enormous potential for all stakeholders, but several barriers exist at the level of the individual patient and practitioner, workforce, health service and society. We have discussed key considerations for implementation including workforce composition, patient-centred care and shared decision making, health literacy, continuity of care, and consideration of preferences for women and culturally diverse communities.

CONCLUSION

This review considers current literature exploring implementation of psychosocial care into the orthopaedic surgery context, informed by current research in musculoskeletal care. This presents a critical opportunity for orthopaedic surgery to provide optimised, equitable, high-value, patient-centred care.

The Quality and Cultural Safety of Online Osteoarthritis Information for Affected Persons and Health Care Professionals: Content Analysis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis is more prevalent and severe among women than among men, but women are less likely to access early diagnosis and first-line management, particularly racialized immigrant women. Previous research advocated for greater access to culturally safe osteoarthritis information for both diverse women and health care professionals. The internet can reduce disparities by facilitating access to health information, but online materials can vary in quality.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the quality and cultural safety of online osteoarthritis materials for persons affected by osteoarthritis and health care professionals.

METHODS

Content analysis was used to describe publicly available materials on osteoarthritis first-line management developed by Canadian organizations for affected persons or health care professionals. Searching, screening, and data extraction were performed in triplicate. We identified materials by searching Google, MEDLINE, and references of osteoarthritis-relevant guidelines and policies, and consulting our research team and collaborators. We assessed quality using DISCERN (University of Oxford) and a compiled framework for affected persons and health care professionals. We compiled frameworks to assess cultural safety. We derived an overall score, categorized as low (<50%), moderate (50%-69%), or high (≥70%+) for criteria met.

RESULTS

After screening 176 items and eliminating 129, we included 47 osteoarthritis materials published between 2013 and 2023. Of those, 43 were for persons with osteoarthritis, most were developed by charities (n=31, 72.1%), based on expert advice (n=16, 55.2%), and in the format of booklets (n=15, 34.9%) or text on web pages (n=10, 23.3%). Of those, 23.3% (10/43) low, 46.5% (20/43) moderate, and 30.2% (13/43) high scored quality; and 25.6% (11/43), 48.8% (21/43), and 25.6% (11/43) were rated low, moderate, and high cultural safety, respectively. Of the 47 included osteoarthritis materials, 4 were for health care professionals. They were developed by a consortium (2/4, 50%), a charity (1/4, 25%), and a professional society (1/4, 25%), and largely based on expert advice (3/4, 75%). The format included infographics (3/4, 75%) and text on web pages (1/4, 25%). Of those, 25% (1/4), 25% (1/4), and 50% (2/4) were rated low, moderate, and high quality, respectively; and all were rated low for cultural safety. Quality and cultural safety did not appear to be associated with the characteristics of osteoarthritis materials (eg, type of developer, development method, and format).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, included osteoarthritis materials for persons with osteoarthritis and health care professionals were of low to moderate quality and cultural safety. These findings reveal the need for further efforts to improve existing or develop new osteoarthritis materials for both affected persons, including ethnoculturally diverse immigrant women, and health care professionals. Further research is needed to assess the quality and cultural safety of osteoarthritis materials developed by organizations outside of Canada and to establish a framework or instrument to assess cultural safety in the osteoarthritis context.

Do clinical guidelines support person-centred care for women affected by dementia: A content analysis

BACKGROUND

Dementia disproportionately affects women including persons living with dementia and caregivers. Person-centered care, rather than disease-focused, is recommended to improve care for affected persons including caregivers. General practitioners play a central role in dementia care but find it challenging due to inadequate training. The study aimed to assess if and how dementia guidelines provide clinicians with guidance on person-centred care for women affected by dementia.

METHODS

We searched for publicly available English-language guidelines on the overall management of dementia in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Guidelines International Network repository. We employed deductive and summative content analysis, and categorized person-centered care guideline content based on established frameworks, and conveyed our results using summary statistics, text, and tables.

RESULTS

We reviewed 15 guidelines published from 2006 to 2020 in eight countries. Few (4, 23%) involved persons living with dementia or caregivers in guideline development. Regarding general person-centred care, guidelines mostly addressed the domains of exchange information (93%), share decisions (93%), enable self-management (93%) and address emotions (87%), while few offered content on manage uncertainty (33%) or foster a healing relationship (13%). Regarding dementia-specific person-centred care, most guidelines addressed intersectionality (tailoring care for diverse characteristics) (80%), but few included content on the domains of quality of life (67%), dignity (53%) or sex/gender issues (20%). Even when mentioned, the guidance was typically brief. We identified 32 general and 18 dementia-specific strategies to achieve person-centered care by compiling information from these guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified inconsistent and insufficient guideline content on person-centred care for women with dementia. Compiled strategies for achieving person-centred care could be used by developers to enhance existing and future dementia guidelines; and inform the development of policies or programs, education, tools for clinicians, and quality improvement measures for evaluating dementia care. Future research is crucial for promoting person-centred dementia care for women living with dementia.

Priority strategies to reduce socio-gendered inequities in access to person-centred osteoarthritis care: Delphi survey

OBJECTIVES

Osteoarthritis (OA) prevalence, severity and related comorbid conditions are greater among women compared with men, but women, particularly racialised women, are less likely than men to access OA care. We aimed to prioritise strategies needed to reduce inequities in OA management.

DESIGN

Delphi survey of 28 strategies derived from primary research retained if at least 80% of respondents rated 6 or 7 on a 7-point Likert scale.

SETTING

Online.

PARTICIPANTS

35 women of diverse ethno-cultural groups and 29 healthcare professionals of various specialties from across Canada.

RESULTS

Of the 28 initial and 3 newly suggested strategies, 27 achieved consensus to retain: 20 in round 1 and 7 in round 2. Respondents retained 7 patient-level, 7 clinician-level and 13 system-level strategies. Women and professionals agreed on all but one patient-level strategy (eg, consider patients' cultural needs and economic circumstances) and all clinician-level strategies (eg, inquire about OA management needs and preferences). Some discrepancies emerged for system-level strategies that were more highly rated by women (eg, implement OA-specific clinics). Comments revealed general support among professionals for system-level strategies provided that additional funding or expanded scope of practice was targeted to only formally trained professionals and did not reduce funding for professionals who already managed OA.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified multilevel strategies that could be implemented by healthcare professionals, organisations or systems to mitigate inequities and improve OA care for diverse women.

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.