Implementing international osteoarthritis treatment guidelines in primary health care: study protocol for the SAMBA stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial

Referral Efficiency for Veterans with Osteoarthritis: A Quality Improvement Project

Management of osteoarthritis, a common disease among veterans, includes referrals to orthopedic specialists. This requires an effective referral system. The aim of this study was to evaluate a quality improvement project addressing inefficiencies in the osteoarthritis referral process between primary care providers and orthopedic specialists. A pre- and post-intervention evaluation using medical record review and provider surveys was conducted to measure the process improvement of a primary care to orthopedic referral template. There was a 3.5% increase in the referral acceptance rate following the intervention. In addition, primary care providers perceived that role clarity and perception on making referrals had significantly improved. The largest perceived improved change among orthopedic specialists was in communication. A simple process change, such as improving the referral template, can help with communication, data transfer, and referral acceptance rates between primary care providers and orthopedic specialists. This in turn will benefit the large population of veterans needing orthopedic referrals for management of osteoarthritis.

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.

The needs, barriers, and opportunities perceived by health professionals for an online competency-based interprofessional course to enhance the care of older adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain

BACKGROUND

It is recommended that continued education in pain should be supported using information and communication technologies (ICTs), but there are gaps about the previous competencies of health professionals, especially in low- and middle-income countries. This study characterized the competencies of professionals in the Colombian Caribbean, the circumstances that favor and hinder the development of appropriate care, as well as the preferences, expectations and attitudes toward an educational intervention supported by ICTs.

METHODS

We used a qualitative, phenomenological approach, combining documentary review and data obtained through observation, an online survey and two focus groups involving 55 healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses and psychologists) of varying experience. For the analysis and integration of results, the Capacity, Opportunity, Motivation and Behavior model and the Theoretical Domains Framework were used as references. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist guided the reporting of this study.

RESULTS

Competency deficits were found regardless of the profession and experience, which are related to inadequacies in undergraduate and post-graduate training. Structural problems in Colombian society and healthcare service organization were also discovered, which were considered unmodifiable barriers and have been aggravated by the social, economic and health effects of the pandemic. The main modifiable barriers found were as follows: pain underestimation and under-treatment of older adults, as well as stereotypes regarding old age and pain, lack of knowledge of the psychosocial determinants of pain and of techniques for its assessment and treatment, overestimation of pharmacological treatment and failure to update pharmacological and non-pharmacological techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations for the design of the educational intervention were established as follows: favoring non-synchronous resources, facilitating synchronous activities of short duration, facilitating permanent access to information and resources and generating incentives for continuing education, such as certification, institutional recognition and encouraging popular recognition.

Health Economic Evaluation Alongside Stepped Wedge Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Recently, there has been an increase in use of the stepped wedge trial (SWT) design in the context of health services research, due to its pragmatic and methodological advantages over the parallel group design.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to summarise the statistical methods used when conducting economic evaluations alongside SWTs.

METHODS

A systematic literature search extending to February 2020 was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) databases to find and evaluate studies where there was an intention to conduct an economic evaluation alongside an SWT. Studies were assessed for their eligibility, findings, reporting of statistical methods and quality of reporting.

RESULTS

Of the 586 studies retrieved from the literature search, 69 studies were identified and included in this systematic review. A total of 54 studies were published protocols, with eight economic evaluations and seven studies reporting full trial results. Included studies varied in terms of their reporting of statistical methods, in both detail and methodology. There were 34 studies that did not report any statistical methods for the economic evaluation, and only 16 studies reported appropriate methods, mainly using some form of mixed/multilevel model, and two used seemingly unrelated regression. Twelve studies reported the use of generic bootstrap methods and other modelling techniques, whilst the remaining studies failed to appropriately account for clustering, correlation or adjustment for time.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of appropriate statistical methods that account for time, clustering and correlation between costs and outcomes is an important part of SWT health economics analysis, one that will benefit from an effort to communicate the methods available and their performance.

PARTNER: a service delivery model to implement optimal primary care management of people with knee osteoarthritis: description of development

OBJECTIVE

Implementation strategies, such as new models of service delivery, are needed to address evidence practice gaps. This paper describes the process of developing and operationalising a new model of service delivery to implement recommended care for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) in a primary care setting.

METHODS

Three development stages occurred concurrently and iteratively. Each stage considered the healthcare context and was informed by stakeholder input. Stage 1 involved the design of a new model of service delivery (PARTNER). Stage 2 developed a behavioural change intervention targeting general practitioners (GPs) using the behavioural change wheel framework. In stage 3, the 'Care Support Team' component of the service delivery model was operationalised.

RESULTS

The focus of PARTNER is to provide patients with education, exercise and/or weight loss advice, and facilitate effective self-management through behavioural change support. Stage 1 model design: based on clinical practice guidelines, known evidence practice gaps in current care, chronic disease management frameworks, input from stakeholders and the opportunities and constraints afforded by the Australian primary care context, we developed the PARTNER service-delivery model. The key components are: (1) an effective GP consultation and (2) follow-up and ongoing care provided remotely (telephone/email/online resources) by a 'Care Support Team'. Stage 2 GP behavioural change intervention: a multimodal behavioural change intervention was developed comprising a self-audit/feedback activity, online professional development and desktop software to provide decision support, patient information resources and a referral mechanism to the 'Care Support Team'. Stage 3 operationalising the 'care support team'-staff recruited and trained in evidence-based knee OA management and behavioural change methodology.

CONCLUSION

The PARTNER model is the result of a comprehensive implementation strategy development process using evidence, behavioural change theory and intervention development guidelines. Technologies for scalable delivery were harnessed and new primary evidence was generated as part of the process.Trial registration number ACTRN12617001595303 (UTN U1111-1197-4809).

Low adherence to exercise may have influenced the proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders in an integrated osteoarthritis care model: secondary analyses from a cluster-randomised stepped-wedge trial

BACKGROUND

To address the well-documented gap between hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment recommendations and current clinical practice, a structured model for integrated OA care was developed and evaluated in a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial. The current study used secondary outcomes to evaluate clinically important response to treatment through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials clinical responder criteria (OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria) after 3 and 6 months between patients receiving the structured OA care model vs. usual care. Secondly, the study aimed to investigate if the proportion of responders in the intervention group was influenced by adherence to the exercise program inherent in the model.

METHODS

The study was conducted in primary healthcare in six Norwegian municipalities. General practitioners and physiotherapists received training in OA treatment recommendations and use of the structured model. The intervention group attended a physiotherapist-led OA education program and performed individually tailored exercises for 8-12 weeks. The control group received usual care. Patient-reported pain, function and global assessment of disease activity during the last week were evaluated using 11-point numeric rating scales (NRS 0-10). These scores were used to calculate the proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders. Two-level mixed logistic regression models were fitted to investigate differences in responders between the intervention and control group.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-four intervention and 109 control group participants with hip and knee OA recruited from primary care in six Norwegian municipalities. In total 47% of the intervention and 35% of the control group participants were responders at 3 or 6 months combined; showing an uncertain between-group difference (OR_adjusted 1.38 (95% CI 0.41, 4.67). In the intervention group, 184 participants completed the exercise programme (exercised ≥2 times/week for ≥8 weeks) and 55% of these were classified as responders. In contrast, 28% of the 86 non-completers were classified as responders.

CONCLUSIONS

The difference in proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders at 3 and 6 months between the intervention and control group was uncertain. In the intervention group, a larger proportion of responders were seen among the exercise completers compared to the non-completers.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02333656. Registered 7. January 2015.

Implementing a structured model for osteoarthritis care in primary healthcare: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND

To improve quality of care for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), a structured model for integrated OA care was developed based on international recommendations. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of this model in primary care.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial with stepped-wedge cohort design in 6 Norwegian municipalities (clusters) between January 2015 and October 2017. The randomised order was concealed to the clusters until the time of crossover from the control to the intervention phase. The intervention was implementation of the SAMBA model, facilitated by interactive workshops for general practitioners and physiotherapists with an update on OA treatment recommendations. Patients in the intervention group attended a physiotherapist-led OA education and individually tailored exercise programme for 8-12 weeks. The primary outcome was patient-reported quality of care (OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire; 0-100, 100 = optimal quality) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported referrals to physiotherapy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and orthopaedic surgeon consultation; patients' satisfaction with care; physical activity level; and proportion of patients who were overweight or obese (body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2). In all, 40 of 80 general practitioners (mean age [SD] 50 [12] years, 42% females) and 37 of 64 physiotherapists (mean age [SD] 42 [8] years, 65% females) participated. They identified 531 patients, of which 393 patients (mean age [SD] 64 [10] years, 71% females) with symptomatic hip or knee OA were included. Among these, 109 patients were recruited during the control periods (control group), and 284 patients were recruited during interventions periods (intervention group). The patients in the intervention group reported significantly higher quality of care (score of 60 versus 41, mean difference 18.9; 95% CI 12.7, 25.1; p < 0.001) and higher satisfaction with OA care (odds ratio [OR] 12.1; 95% CI 6.44, 22.72; p < 0.001) compared to patients in the control group. The increase in quality of care was close to, but below, the pre-specified minimal important change. In the intervention group, a higher proportion was referred to physiotherapy (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.08, 5.73; p = 0.03), a higher proportion fulfilled physical activity recommendations (OR 9.3; 95% CI 2.87, 30.37; p < 0.001), and a lower proportion was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.08, 0.80; p = 0.02), as compared to the control group. There were no significant group differences regarding referral to MRI (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.13, 2.38; p = 0.42) and proportion of patients who were overweight or obese (OR 1.3; 95% CI 0.70, 2.51; p = 0.34). Study limitations include the imbalance in patient group size, which may have been due to an increased attention to OA patients among the health professionals during the intervention phase, and a potential recruitment bias as the patient participants were identified by their health professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a structured model in primary care resulted in higher quality of OA care as compared to usual care. Future studies should explore ways to implement the structured model for integrated OA care on a larger scale.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02333656.

Priorities for the effective implementation of osteoarthritis management programs: an OARSI international consensus exercise

OBJECTIVE

The Joint Effort Initiative was endorsed by Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) in 2018 as a collaboration between international researchers and clinicians with an interest in the implementation of osteoarthritis management programs (OAMPs). This study aimed to identify and prioritise activities for future work of the Joint Effort Initiative.

DESIGN

A survey was emailed to delegates of the 2018 OARSI World Congress attending a pre-conference workshop or with a known interest in OAMPs (n = 115). Delegates were asked about the most important issues regarding OAMP implementation. The top 20 issues were synthesised into 17 action statements, and respondents were invited to participate in a priority ranking exercise to determine the order of importance of the statements.

RESULTS

Survey respondents (n = 51, 44%) were most commonly female (71%), with an allied health background (57%), affiliated with universities (73%) from Oceania (37%), and Europe/UK (45%). The five highest ranked action statements were: CONCLUSION: Prioritising statements will bring focus to the future work of the Joint Effort Initiative in the future and provide a basis for longer-term actions.

Implementing international osteoarthritis guidelines in primary care: uptake and fidelity among health professionals and patients

OBJECTIVE

This paper evaluates the implementation fidelity of a strategy and intervention used to implement osteoarthritis (OA) treatment recommendations in primary care. We also evaluate uptake of core treatment (patient information, exercise and referral to weight management) among OA patients.

DESIGN

A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled study (RCT) in primary care. The study involved general practitioners (GPs), physiotherapists (PTs) and patients with hip and/or knee OA in six Norwegian municipalities (clusters). Workshops for general practitioners (GPs) and PTs represented the main implementation activity. Uptake of core treatment (patient education, exercise and weight management) was evaluated using self-reported data from the patient intervention and control group, analysed with logistic regression models. Fidelity was evaluated using six components representing adherence to the content and dose instructions in the implementation strategy and assessed against a-priori criteria for high adherence.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 40 GPs, 37 PTs and 393 OA patients. The patient-reported data showed statistically significant higher uptake for exercise, patient education and referral to support for weight reduction, among the intervention group compared to the control group (P < 0.05). Evaluation of fidelity showed high adherence to GP and PT workshop attendance and physiotherapy use, partly adherence to PT knowledge after workshops, and low adherence to exercise attendance, dose and progression instructions.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation strategy and intervention successfully improved OA patients' access to physiotherapy and uptake of recommended core treatment. However, the strategy was less effective in providing exercise programs with sufficient dose and progression and in supporting patients' adherence to the exercise program.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02333656.