Referral decisions and its predictors related to orthopaedic care. A retrospective study in a novel primary care setting

An online training and feedback module enhances the musculoskeletal examination performance of medical interns

BACKGROUND

Pathologies of the locomotor system are frequent and can cause disability and impact the quality of life of the people affected. In recent years, online training and feedback have emerged as learning tools in many fields of medicine.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate medical interns' musculoskeletal examination performance after completing an online training and feedback module.

METHODS

This study employed a quasi-experimental design. Medical interns were invited to complete a 4-week musculoskeletal physical examination training and feedback module via an e-learning platform. The course included written and audiovisual content pertaining to medical history, physical examination, and specific tests for the diagnosis of the most common knee, spine, shoulder, ankle, and foot conditions. Before and after completing the module, their ability to perform the physical examination was evaluated using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with simulated patients that took place face-to-face. A control group of experts was assessed using the OSCE, and their performance was compared to that of the interns before and after the training. At the end of the module feedback on the OSCE was provided to participants through the platform asynchronously and two evaluation questions about the user experience were conducted at the end of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 35 subjects were assessed using the OSCE, including 29 interns and 6 experts. At the beginning of the training module, the group of interns obtained an average score of 50.6 ± 15.1. At the end of the module, 18 interns retook the OSCE, and their performance increased significantly to an average of 76.6 ± 12.8 (p < 0.01). Prior to the training, the experts performed significantly better than the interns (71.2 vs. 50.6; p = 0.01). After the interns received the training and feedback, there were no significant differences between the two groups (71.2 vs. 76.6; p = 0.43). Two evaluation questions were conducted at the end of the study, revealing that 93% of the participants affirm that the training module will be useful in their clinical practice, and 100% of the participants would recommend the training module to a colleague.

CONCLUSION

The online training and feedback module enhances the musculoskeletal examination performance of medical interns.

Implementation of a Decision Aid for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis in Orthopedics: A Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation

BACKGROUND

In orthopedics, the use of patient decision aids (ptDAs) is limited. With a mixed-method process evaluation, we investigated patient factors associated with accepting versus declining the use of the ptDA, patients' reasons for declining the ptDA, and clinicians' perceived barriers and facilitators for its use.

METHODS

Patients with an indication for joint replacement surgery (N = 153) completed questionnaires measuring demographics, physical functioning, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), and a visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at 1 time point. Subsequently, their clinician offered them the relevant ptDA. Using a retrospective design, we compared patients who used the ptDA (59%) with patients who declined (41%) on all these measures as well as the chosen treatment. If the use of the ptDA was declined, patients' reasons were recorded by their clinician and analysed (n = 46). To evaluate the experiences of clinicians (n = 5), semistructured interviews were conducted and thematically analyzed. Clinicians who did not use the ptDA substantially (<10 times) were also interviewed (n = 3).

RESULTS

Compared with patients who used the ptDA, patients who declined use had higher VAS pain scores (7.2 v. 6.2, P < .001), reported significantly worse quality of life (on 4 of 6 EQ-5D-3L subscales), and were less likely to receive nonsurgical treatment (4% v. 28%, P < .001). Of the patients who declined to use the ptDA, 46% said they had enough information and felt ready to make a decision without the ptDA. The interviews revealed that clinicians considered the ptDAs most useful for newly diagnosed patients who had not received previous treatment.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that the uptake of a ptDA may be improved if it is introduced in the early disease stages of hip and knee osteoarthritis.

HIGHLIGHTS

Patients who declined the use of a patient decision aid (ptDA) for hip and knee osteoarthritis reported more pain and worse quality of life.Most patients who declined to use a ptDA felt sufficiently well informed to make a treatment decision.Patients who declined the ptDA were more likely to have received prior treatment in primary care.Clinicians found the ptDA to be a helpful addition to the consultation, particularly for newly diagnosed patients.

Diagnosing knee osteoarthritis in patients, differences between general practitioners and orthopedic surgeons: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

knee complaints are one of the most common reasons to consult the general practitioners in the Netherlands and contribute to the increasing burden on general practitioners. A proportion of patients that are referred to orthopedic outpatient clinics are potentially referred unnecessarily. We believe osteoarthritis is not always considered by general practitioners as the cause of atraumatic knee complaints. This may impede early recognition and timely care of osteoarthritis complaints and lead to unnecessary referrals.

METHODS

the aim of this study was to compare the frequency of (differential) diagnosis of osteoarthritis mentioned in referral letters of general practitioners with the frequency of osteoarthritis mentioned as orthopedic diagnosis at the outpatient clinic. Therefore we conducted a retrospective cohort study based on data collected from referral letters and the corresponding outpatient clinic reports of patients with atraumatic knee complaints of 45 years or older referred to a regional hospital in Nijmegen, The Netherlands in the period from 1-6-2019 until 1-01-2020.

RESULTS

a total of 292 referral letters were included. In the younger aged patients (45-54 years) osteoarthritis was mentioned less frequent and meniscal lesions were mentioned more frequent in referral letters when compared to diagnoses made at the outpatient clinic. Differences in differential diagnosis of osteoarthritis as well as meniscal lesions between orthopedic surgeon and general practitioners were found (both p < 0.001, McNemar). Matching diagnoses were present in 58.2% when all referral letters were analyzed (n = 292) and 75.2% when only referrals containing a differential diagnosis were analyzed (n = 226). Matching diagnoses were present in 31.6% in the younger age categories (45-54 years). A linear trend showing fewer matching diagnoses in younger patient categories was observed (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoarthritis was less frequently mentioned in general practitioner referral letters among the differential diagnosis then it was diagnosed at the outpatient clinic, especially in younger patients (45-54 years). Also matching diagnoses in younger patients were evidently lower than in older patients, partly explained by underdiagnosing of osteoarthritis in younger patients in this cohort. Better recognition of osteoarthritis in younger patients and changing the diagnostic approach of general practitioners might improve efficacy in knee care. Future research should focus on the effectiveness of musculoskeletal triage, the need for multidisciplinary educational programs for patients and promotion of conservative treatment modalities among general practitioners.

Substitution or addition: An observational study of a new primary care initiative in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

In 2014, the Primary Care Plus (PC+) model was introduced in the Netherlands to shift low-complex specialised care from the hospital to the primary care setting. While positive effects of PC+ have been documented at individual patient level concerning health-related quality of life, perceived quality of care and care costs, its impacts on service use at the population level remain uncertain.

METHODS

In this observational study, we used retrospective health insurance reimbursement claims data from the largest health insurer in the intervention region to determine service use. We assessed PC+ and secondary care insurance claims (i.e. claims of the regional hospital and claims of other secondary care settings in and outside the region visited by patients from the intervention region) from 2015 to 2018 and compared these to the national level.

RESULTS

The total number of claims related to low-complex specialised care in the intervention region showed an increase over time. The increase in claims was related to PC+. The number of claims related to the regional hospital and other secondary care settings decreased over time. During the same period, a declining trend in claims at the national level was observed.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of the PC+ model in one region in the Netherlands was associated with an increase in the use of low-complex specialised care. This suggests that the ability of the PC+ model to substitute for specialist care at population level may be limited. Going forward, it will be important to continue monitoring and evaluating service use as substitution effects may materialise only over a longer timeframe.

A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Decision Support Systems for Healthcare Referral Strategies

BACKGROUND

The referral process is an important research focus because of the potential consequences of delays, especially for patients with serious medical conditions that need immediate care, such as those with metastatic cancer. Thus, a systematic literature review of recent and influential manuscripts is critical to understanding the current methods and future directions in order to improve the referral process.

METHODS

A hybrid bibliometric-structured review was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Searches were conducted of three databases, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, in addition to the references from the eligible papers. The papers were considered to be eligible if they were relevant English articles or reviews that were published from January 2010 to June 2021. The searches were conducted using three groups of keywords, and bibliometric analysis was performed, followed by content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 163 papers that were published in impactful journals between January 2010 and June 2021 were selected. These papers were then reviewed, analyzed, and categorized as follows: descriptive analysis (n = 77), cause and effect (n = 12), interventions (n = 50), and quality management (n = 24). Six future research directions were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimal attention was given to the study of the primary referral of blood cancer cases versus those with solid cancer types, which is a gap that future studies should address. More research is needed in order to optimize the referral process, specifically for suspected hematological cancer patients.

Disappointing evaluation of a shared decision-making intervention for residents and orthopaedic surgeons

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention in orthopaedic hip and knee osteoarthritis care.

METHODS

Using a pre- post intervention design study, we tested an intervention, that included a decision aid for patients (ptDA) and a SDM training course for residents in training and orthopaedic surgeons. The theory of planned behaviour was used for intervention development. Primary outcomes included patient reported decisional conflict, SDM, and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were physicians' attitude and knowledge, and uptake of the ptDA.

RESULTS

317 patients were included. The intervention improved physicians' knowledge about SDM but had no effect on the primary outcomes. 19 eligible patients used the ptDA (17%). SDM was higher for middle educated patients compared to lower educated (mean difference 9.91, p=0.004), patients who saw surgeons instead of residents (mean difference 5.46, p=0.044) and when surgery was chosen and desired by patients compared to situations where surgery was desired but not chosen (mean difference 15.39, p=0.036).

CONCLUSION

Our multifaceted intervention did not improve SDM and ptDA uptake was low.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

In orthopaedic hip and knee osteoarthritic care other ways should be explored to successful implement SDM. Since residents received lower SDM scores, special focus should go to this group.

Economic Evaluation of New Models of Care: Does the Decision Change Between Cost-Utility Analysis and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis?

OBJECTIVES

To experiment with new approaches of collaboration in healthcare delivery, local authorities implement new models of care. Regarding the local decision context of these models, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) may be of added value to cost-utility analysis (CUA), because it covers a wider range of outcomes. This study compares the 2 methods using a side-by-side application.

METHODS

A new Dutch model of care, Primary Care Plus (PC+), was used as a case study to compare the results of CUA and MCDA. Data of patients referred to PC+ or care-as-usual were retrieved by questionnaires and administrative databases with a 3-month follow-up. Propensity score matching together with generalized linear regression models was used to reduce confounding. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore uncertainty in the results.

RESULTS

Although both methods indicated PC+ as the dominant alternative, complementary differences were observed. MCDA provided additional evidence that PC+ improved access to care (standardized performance score of 0.742 vs 0.670) and that improvement in health-related quality of life was driven by the psychological well-being component (standardized performance score of 0.710 vs 0.704). Furthermore, MCDA estimated the budget required for PC+ to be affordable in addition to preferable (€521.42 per patient). Additionally, MCDA was less sensitive to the utility measures used.

CONCLUSIONS

MCDA may facilitate an auditable and transparent evaluation of new models of care by providing additional information on a wider range of outcomes and incorporating affordability. However, more effort is needed to increase the usability of MCDA among local decision makers.

Reorganising dermatology care: predictors of the substitution of secondary care with primary care

Background

The substitution of healthcare is a way to control rising healthcare costs. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention of the Dutch ‘Blue Care’ pioneer site aims to achieve this feat by facilitating consultations with medical specialists in the primary care setting. One of the specialties involved is dermatology. This study explores referral decisions following dermatology care in PC+ and the influence of predictive patient and consultation characteristics on this decision.

Methods

This retrospective study used clinical data of patients who received dermatology care in PC+ between January 2015 and March 2017. The referral decision following PC+, (i.e., referral back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care) was the primary outcome. Stepwise logistic regression modelling was used to describe variations in the referral decisions following PC+, with patient age and gender, number of PC+ consultations, patient diagnosis and treatment specialist as the predicting factors.

Results

A total of 2952 patients visited PC+ for dermatology care. Of those patients with a registered referral, 80.2% (N = 2254) were referred back to the GP, and 19.8% (N = 558) were referred to outpatient hospital care. In the multivariable model, only the treating specialist and patient’s diagnosis independently influenced the referral decisions following PC+.

Conclusion

The aim of PC+ is to reduce the number of referrals to outpatient hospital care. According to the results, the treating specialist and patient diagnosis influence referral decisions. Therefore, the results of this study can be used to discuss and improve specialist and patient profiles for PC+ to further optimise the effectiveness of the initiative.