Multimodal Treatment Patterns for Osteoarthritis and Their Relationship to Patient-Reported Pain Severity: A Cross-Sectional Survey in the United States

Appraisal of quality and analysis of the similarities and differences between osteoarthritis Clinical Practice Guideline recommendations: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) aim to support management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), but recommendations are often conflicting and implementation is poor, contributing to evidence-to-practice gaps. This systematic review investigated the contextual and methodological factors contributing to conflicting recommendations for hip and knee OA.

METHOD

Our systematic review appraised CPGs for managing hip and knee OA in adults ≥18 years (PROSPERO CRD42021276635). We used AGREE-II and AGREE-REX to assess quality and extracted data on treatment gaps, conflicts, biases, and consensus. Heterogeneity of recommendations was determined using Weighted Fleiss Kappa (K). The relationship between (K) and AGREE-II/AGREE-REX scores was explored.

RESULTS

We identified 25 CPGs across eight countries and four international organisations. The ACR, EULAR, NICE, OARSI and RACGP guidelines scored highest for overall AGREE-II quality (83%). The highest overall AGREE-REX scores were for BMJ Arthroscopy (80%), RACGP (78%) and NICE (76%). CPGs with the least agreement for pharmacological recommendations were ESCEO and NICE (-0.14), ACR (-0.08), and RACGP (-0.01). The highest agreements were between RACGP and NICE (0.53), RACGP and ACR (0.61), and NICE and ACR (0.91). Decreased internal validity determined by low-quality AGREE scores(<60%) in editorial independence were associated with less agreement for pharmacological recommendations.

CONCLUSION

There were associations between guideline quality and agreement scores. Future guideline development should be informed by robust evidence, editorial independence and methodological rigour to ensure a harmonisation of recommendations. End-users of CPGs must recognise the contextual factors associated with the development of OA CPGs and balance these factors with available evidence.

Integrated pain care models and the importance of aligning stakeholder values

Sustained widespread deployment of clinically and cost-effective models of integrated pain care could be bolstered by optimally aligning shared stakeholder values.

Current Approaches to Four Challenging Pain Syndromes

During a conference of pain specialists, some of the experts addressed the potential management of four prevalent but difficult painful conditions, namely, chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), knee osteoarthritis, chest trauma, and facet joint arthropathy. In all cases, the conditions posed challenges in accurate diagnoses as well as safe, effective treatments, especially using locoregional blocks. It is not clear why some surgical patients develop CPSP and others do not, although some risk factors have been identified. More importantly, the transitional phase of pain from acute to chronic deserves greater scrutiny. It appears as if more aggressive and more effective perioperative and postoperative analgesia could help mitigate or possibly prevent CPSP. Knee osteoarthritis is prevalent but is often managed pharmacologically and then with joint replacement; many patients simply live with the condition which can be viewed as a disease of the entire joint. New approaches with intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid, platelet-rich plasma, and botulinum toxin may provide safe, effective, and durable pain control. Chest trauma can be extremely painful and a source of morbidity, but its management tends to rely on watchful waiting and drug therapy. New approaches to regional nerve blocks can be beneficial and may reduce troublesome symptoms such as the inability to cough or clear the lungs. Facet joint arthropathy is very prevalent among older people but is not completely clarified. It may be the source of intense pain with limited management strategies. The role of nerve blocks in facet joint arthropathy is an important new addition to the armamentarium of pain management, particularly for geriatric patients.

Bibliometric Analysis of Publications in Clinical Trials on Knee Osteoarthritis Between 2001 and 2022

Purpose

Clinical treatment of knee osteoarthritis has gained great interest, and numerous clinical studies have been reported. Few studies have described the detailed characterizations of clinical trials on knee osteoarthritis. This study is to identify, visualize, and characterize the clinical trials in knee osteoarthritis research.

Design and Methods

Articles published in recent two decades were extracted from the Web of Science core collection database using a query based on MeSH terms and topics of knee osteoarthritis and clinical trial. Basic characteristics of publications were analyzed based on the publication year, authors, institutions, counties, and keywords covered in the article. CiteSpace and VOS viewer were used for data visualization. The data were retrieved on May 28, 2022.

Results

A total of 1972 trials on knee osteoarthritis were identified. The number of publications has experienced rapid growth in the past two decades. America, England, and China had strong contributions in publication. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases and American Journal of Sports Medicine were highly cited and bellwether journals. Clustering mapping of the collaborative network, co-citation, and co-occurrence analyses showed that the research hotspots are mainly focused on disease-modifying medications, intra-articular injections, physical therapy for symptom control, lifestyle intervention, Chinese medicine treatment, and knee replacement.

Conclusion

Clinical treatments of knee OA are evolving. Pharmacologic therapy, intra-articular therapy, nonpharmacologic therapy including exercise or diet, self-management programs, Chinese medicine treatment, and knee replacement were highly represented in clinical trials of knee OA. Adjustment of combination therapy may be the next study focus in the future.

Opioids for Osteoarthritis: Cross-Sectional Survey of Patient Perspectives and Satisfaction

Patients often take opioids to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain despite limited benefits and potential harms. This study aimed to compare cross-sectional perspectives of patients that were taking prescription opioid (N = 471) or nonopioid medications (N = 185) for OA in terms of satisfaction, expectations of effectiveness, and concerns. Patients prescribed opioids (>7 days) reported more prior treatments (2.47 vs. 1.74), greater mean pain intensity (5.47 vs. 4.11), and worse quality of life (EQ-5D-5L index value mean 0.45 vs. 0.71) than patients prescribed nonopioid medications (all p < 0.0001). Based on linear regression models adjusting for demographics and pain intensity, patients prescribed opioids were less satisfied with overall regimen (3.40 vs. 3.67, p = 0.0322), had less belief that medications were meeting effectiveness expectations (2.72 vs. 3.13, p < 0.0001), and had more concerns about treatments being "not very good" (3.66 vs. 3.22, p = 0.0026) and addiction (3.30 vs. 2.65, p < 0.0001) than patients prescribed nonopioid regimens. When the models were replicated for subgroups with ≥30 days' medication regimen duration, the findings were consistent with the main analyses. Patients have concerns about the risk of opioid addiction, but those with greater disease burden and more prior treatments continue taking opioid regimens.

The effectiveness of acupuncture as an adjunctive therapy to oral pharmacological medication in patient with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to find out whether the combined treatment of acupuncture and oral medication is more effective than sole oral medication in reducing pain and improving knee function at the end of treatment and after short-term period (4-6 weeks after treatment). Second, if it is effective, we investigated whether the effect surpasses the minimal clinically important difference.

METHODS

Articles published between January 1, 1992, and August 31, 2022, were searched in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. The PICO (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) of this study are as follows: Population: knee osteoarthritis patients; Intervention: acupuncture (non-sham acupuncture) + oral medication (analgesic or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs); Comparison: oral medication (analgesic or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs); Outcome: visual analog scale (VAS) or Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index.

RESULTS

The combined treatment of oral medication and adjuvant acupuncture showed statistically significant improvement in VAS and WOMAC scores at the end of acupuncture treatment and short-term follow-up time (between 4 and 6 weeks after acupuncture). In addition, the degree of improvement of VAS and WOMAC index showed effects beyond minimal clinically important differences compared to pretreatment at both the end of acupuncture treatment and the short-term follow-up of acupuncture treatment.

CONCLUSION

The existing evidence suggests that adjuvant acupuncture may play a role in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. However, physicians should be aware of adverse effects such as hematoma in adjuvant acupuncture treatment.

Prescription patterns and predictors of unmet pain relief in patients with difficult-to-treat osteoarthritis in the Nordics: analyses from the BISCUITS study

OBJECTIVES

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Pain is the most important symptom in OA, driving medical care, disability, reduced functionality, and decreased quality of life. The objective of this study was to describe prescription patterns of difficult-to-treat OA and explore possible predictors of unmet pain relief in Nordic patients.

METHODS

This observational cohort study included patients with a confirmed diagnosis of OA (index date) in specialty care in Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2012 who were followed for up to 5 years. Four subgroups were pre-defined to characterize difficult-to-treat OA: (1) ≥2 chronic comorbidities in the 3-year pre-index period; (2) top 10% of healthcare resource users, 1-year post-index; (3) ≥3 types of prescription pain medications during pre-index period to first year post-index, with ≥30 days between types; (4) having a contraindication to a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Patient characteristics, prescription patterns and predictors of unmet pain relief (defined as persistent opioid use, using several types of opioids or long-term NSAID use) were analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified 288,174 OA patients and the average age was 63.5 years at time of diagnosis and 58% of them were female. After 5 years, 35-50% of the patients defined as 'difficult-to-treat' had ≥1 prescription of opioids, compared to 20-25% of all OA patients (p-value <0.05). Comorbidities and disability pension were strong predictors of unmet pain relief (p-value <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a substantial use of pain medications (NSAID and opioids) in difficult-to-treat OA patients. These findings suggest that pain may be inadequately managed in a considerable number of patients with OA, particularly those with contraindications to an NSAID. A high comorbid and socioeconomic burden are relevant risk factors among patients who continue to use opioids for a long period of time.

Patient characteristics, pain treatment patterns, and incidence of total joint replacement in a US population with osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Currently available medications for chronic osteoarthritis pain are only moderately effective, and their use is limited in many patients because of serious adverse effects and contraindications. The primary surgical option for osteoarthritis is total joint replacement (TJR). The objectives of this study were to describe the treatment history of patients with osteoarthritis receiving prescription pain medications and/or intra-articular corticosteroid injections, and to estimate the incidence of TJR in these patients.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter, cohort study utilized health plan administrative claims data (January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2019) of adult patients with osteoarthritis in the Innovation in Medical Evidence Development and Surveillance Distributed Database, a subset of the US FDA Sentinel Distributed Database. Patients were analyzed in two cohorts: those with prevalent use of "any pain medication" (prescription non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], opioids, and/or intra-articular corticosteroid injections) using only the first qualifying dispensing (index date); and those with prevalent use of "each specific pain medication class" with all qualifying treatment episodes identified.

RESULTS

Among 1 992 670 prevalent users of "any pain medication", pain medications prescribed on the index date were NSAIDs (596 624 [29.9%] patients), opioids (1 161 806 [58.3%]), and intra-articular corticosteroids (323 459 [16.2%]). Further, 92 026 patients received multiple pain medications on the index date, including 71 632 (3.6%) receiving both NSAIDs and opioids. Altogether, 20.6% of patients used an NSAID at any time following an opioid index dispensing and 17.2% used an opioid following an NSAID index dispensing. The TJR incidence rates per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI]) were 3.21 (95% CI: 3.20-3.23) in the "any pain medication" user cohort, and among those receiving "each specific pain medication class" were NSAIDs, 4.63 (95% CI: 4.58-4.67); opioids, 7.45 (95% CI: 7.40-7.49); and intra-articular corticosteroids, 8.05 (95% CI: 7.97-8.13).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with prescription medications for osteoarthritis pain, opioids were more commonly prescribed at index than NSAIDs and intra-articular corticosteroid injections. Of the pain medication classes examined, the incidence of TJR was highest in patients receiving intra-articular corticosteroids and lowest in patients receiving NSAIDs.

Factors associated with physician-reported treatment status of patients with osteoarthritis pain

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is typically associated with pain, but many patients are not treated.

METHODS

This point in time study explored factors associated with treatment status, using logistic regression of data from the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme conducted in the United States. Patients' treatment status was based on physician-reported, current: 1) prescription medication for OA vs. none; and 2) physician treatment (prescription medication and/or recommendation for specified nonpharmacologic treatment for OA [physical or occupational therapy, acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, or cognitive behavior therapy/psychotherapy]) vs. self-management (no prescription medication or specified nonpharmacologic treatment).

RESULTS

The 841 patients (including 57.0% knee OA, 31.9% hip OA) reported mild (45.4%) or moderate or severe (54.6%) average pain intensity over the last week. The majority were prescribed medication and/or recommended specified nonpharmacologic treatment; 218 were not prescription-medicated and 122 were self-managed. Bivariate analyses showed less severe patient-reported pain intensity and physician-rated OA severity, fewer joints affected by OA, lower proportion of joints affected by knee OA, better health status, lower body mass index, and lower ratings for cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks, for those not prescribed medication (vs. prescription-medicated). Multivariate analyses confirmed factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with prescription medication included (odds ratio): physician-rated current moderate OA severity (vs. mild, 2.03), patient-reported moderate OA severity 6 months ago (vs. mild, 1.71), knee OA (vs. not, 1.81), physician-recommended (0.28) and patient-reported (0.43) over-the-counter medication use (vs. not), prior surgery for OA (vs. not, 0.37); uncertain income was also significant. Factors significantly (p < 0.05) associated with physician treatment included (odds ratio): physician-recommended nonpharmacologic therapy requiring no/minimal medical supervision (vs. not, 2.21), physician-rated current moderate OA severity (vs. mild, 2.04), patient-reported over-the-counter medication use (vs. not, 0.26); uncertain time since diagnosis was also significant. Patient-reported pain intensity and most demographic factors were not significant in either model.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 1 in 4 patients were not prescribed medication and 1 in 7 were self-managed, although many were using over-the-counter medications or nonpharmacologic therapies requiring no/minimal medical supervision. Multiple factors were significantly associated with treatment status, including OA severity and over-the-counter medication, but not pain intensity or most demographics.

An Observational Retrospective Matched Cohort Study of Healthcare Resource Utilisation and Costs in UK Patients with Moderate to Severe Osteoarthritis Pain

Introduction

Using data from patients residing in Salford, UK, we aimed to compare healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs between patients with moderate to severe (M-S) or severe osteoarthritis (OA) pain and those without OA.

Methods

Patients with a M-S OA pain event within a period of chronic pain were indexed from the Salford Integrated Record (SIR) between 2010 and 2017. Patients with a severe pain event formed an OA subcohort. Patients in each OA pain cohort were independently matched to patients without OA, forming two control cohorts. HCRU, prescribed analgesic drugs, and total direct costs per UK standardised tariffs were calculated for the year post-index. Multivariable models were used to identify drivers of healthcare cost.

Results

The M-S OA pain and control cohorts each comprised 3123 patients; the severe OA pain and control cohorts each comprised 1922 patients. Patients in both OA pain cohorts had a significantly higher mean number of general practitioner encounters, inpatient, outpatient, and accident and emergency visits, and were prescribed a broader range of analgesic drugs in the year post-index than respective controls. Mean healthcare costs of all types were significantly higher in the M-S and severe OA pain cohorts vs controls (total: M-S £2519 vs £1379; severe £3389 vs £1397). Paracetamol (M-S: 40% of patients had at least one prescription; severe: 50%) and strong opioids (34% and 59%) were the analgesics most prescribed to patients with OA pain. In all cohorts, multivariable models showed that a higher age at index, the presence of gout, osteoporosis, type 2 diabetes, or coronary artery disease, significantly contributed towards higher healthcare costs.

Conclusion

In the population of Salford, UK, patients with M-S OA pain had significantly higher annual HCRU and costs compared with matched controls without OA; generally, these were even higher in patients with severe OA pain.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-022-00431-2.

A Retrospective Claims-Based Study Evaluating Clinical and Economic Burden Among Patients With Moderate to Severe Osteoarthritis Pain in the United States

Background: There has been limited evaluation of medication adherence, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and healthcare costs over time in patients with osteoarthritis (OA), and stratification by pain severity level has not been reported. Assessing such longitudinal changes may be useful to patients and healthcare providers for tracking disease progression, informing treatment options, and employing strategies to optimize patient outcomes. Objectives: To characterize treatment patterns, HCRU, and costs over time in patients with moderate to severe (MTS) OA pain in the United States. Methods: We conducted a retrospective claims analysis, using IBM® MarketScan® databases, from 2013-2018. Eligible patients were aged ≥45 years with ≥12 months pre-index (baseline) and ≥24 months (follow-up) of continuous enrollment; index date was defined as a physician diagnosis of hip or knee OA. An algorithm was employed to identify MTS OA pain patients, who were propensity score matched with patients having non-MTS OA pain. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and univariate analyses. Results: After propensity score matching, the overall OA pain cohorts consisted of 186 374 patients each: 61% were female, mean age was 63 years, and two-thirds (65.6%) were of working age (45-65 years). Sleep-related conditions, anxiety, and depression were significantly higher in the MTS OA pain cohort vs non-MTS (P<0.001). At baseline and 12- and 24-month follow-ups, receipt of prescription pain medications, HCRU, and direct medical costs were significantly higher in the MTS OA pain cohort (all P<0.01). Medication adherence was significantly higher in the MTS OA pain cohort for all medication classes except analgesics/antipyretics, which were significantly lower vs the non-MTS OA pain cohort (all P<0.0001). Conclusions: The burden of MTS OA pain is substantial, with patterns that show increasing medication use, HCRU, and costs vs non-MTS OA pain patients over time. Understanding the heterogeneity within the OA population may allow us to further appreciate the true burden of illness for patients in pain.

Satisfaction with Medications Prescribed for Osteoarthritis: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Patients and Their Physicians in the United States

Introduction

Satisfaction with medications prescribed for osteoarthritis (OA) varies; this study aimed to determine the factors associated with satisfaction in US patients and their physicians.

Methods

This point-in-time study used the Adelphi OA Disease Specific Programme (physicians identified from public lists reported on nine consecutive patients diagnosed with OA [any joint]: physicians and patients completed questionnaires). Patient’s demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics associated with patient-reported and physician-rated overall satisfaction with, and expectations of effectiveness of, medication for OA were assessed using multivariate linear regression.

Results

Responses from 572 patients (mean age 64.9 years, 60.5% female) currently prescribed medication for OA and 153 physicians (81 primary care, 35 rheumatologists, 37 orthopedic surgeons) were analyzed. Pain intensity was moderate or severe for 59.4% of patients. Greater patient-reported overall satisfaction with medication was significantly associated with (standardized beta, 95% confidence interval) exercise (0.12, 0.03–0.20), comorbid other musculoskeletal or painful conditions (vs none) (0.15, 0.06–0.24), and physicians’ report that the best control had been achieved (0.12, 0.03–0.20); lack of efficacy was among factors associated with worse satisfaction. Greater patient-reported expectation of effectiveness was significantly associated with exercise (0.12, 0.03–0.21) and the most troublesome joint not being a knee, hip, or their back (0.08, 0.01–0.14). Greater physician-rated overall satisfaction with medication was significantly associated with their report that the best control had been achieved (0.18, 0.11–0.26), the most troublesome joint being a knee (0.08, 0.01–0.14), comorbid other musculoskeletal or painful conditions (0.07, 0.01–0.12), obesity (0.06, 0.00–0.11), and female patients (0.06, 0.00–0.11); lack of efficacy and adverse events/tolerability issues were among factors associated with worse satisfaction. For physicians, their report that the best control had been achieved (0.19, 0.11–0.27), the most troublesome joint being a knee (0.08, 0.00–0.15), improving (vs stable) OA (0.15, 0.07–0.24), and uncertain duration of OA (0.11, 0.02–0.21) were associated with greater perception that the medication was meeting patients’ efficacy expectations.

Conclusion

Although efficacy was strongly associated with both patients’ and physicians’ satisfaction with medication, other factors were also important, including exercise (for patients), tolerability (for physicians), and knee OA (for physicians).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00350-0.

A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of the Impact of Osteoarthritis on Disability Leave, Workers' Compensation Claims, and Healthcare Payments

OBJECTIVES

Examine short-term disability (STD) and workers' compensation (WC) associated leave and wage replacements, and overall direct healthcare payments, among employees with osteoarthritis (OA) versus other chronically painful conditions; quantifying the impact of opioid use.

METHODS

Analysis of employees with more than or equal to two STD or WC claims for OA or pre-specified chronically painful conditions (control) in the IBM MarketScan Research Databases (2014 to 2017).

RESULTS

The OA cohort (n = 144,355) had an estimated +1.2 STD days, +$152 STD payments, and +$1410 healthcare payments relative to the control cohort (n = 392,639; P < 0.001). WC days/payments were similar. Differences were partially driven by an association between opioid use, increased STD days/payments, and healthcare payments observed in pooled cohorts (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

OA is associated with high STD days/payments and healthcare payments. Opioid use significantly contributes to these and this should be considered when choosing treatment.

Moderate to Severe Osteoarthritis Pain and Its Impact on Patients in the United States: A National Survey

Purpose

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common causes of chronic pain and a leading cause of disability in the US. The objective of this study was to examine the clinical and economic burden of OA by pain severity.

Patients and Methods

We used nationally representative survey data. Adults ≥18 years with self-reported physician-diagnosed OA and experiencing OA pain were included in the study. OA pain severity was measured using the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire Visual Analog Scale (SF-MPQ-VAS). Data were collected for demographics, clinical characteristics, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), productivity, OA treatment, adherence to pain medication, and healthcare resource utilization. Univariate analysis was performed to examine differences between respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain vs those with mild OA pain.

Results

Higher proportions of respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain (n=3798) compared with mild OA pain (n=2038) were female (69.4% vs 57.3%), <65 years of age (54.8% vs 43.4%), and not employed (70.6% vs 64.5%). Respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain experienced OA pain daily (80.8% vs 48.8%), were obese (53.0% vs 40.5%), had more comorbidities (sleep disturbance, insomnia, depression, and anxiety), and reported significantly poorer health status and HRQoL, and greater productivity and activity impairment (all P<0.05). Moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents were prescribed significantly more pain medications than mild OA pain respondents (41.0% vs 17.0%) and had higher adherence (75.9% vs 64.1%) yet were less satisfied with their pain medications (all P<0.001). Outpatient and emergency room visits, and hospitalizations in the 6 months prior to the survey were significantly higher in moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents vs those with mild OA pain (all P<0.05).

Conclusion

Patient and clinical burden was significantly greater in moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents vs mild OA pain respondents and may inform decision-making for appropriate resource allocation and effective management strategies that target specific subgroups.

Treating osteoarthritis pain: mechanisms of action of acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and nerve growth factor antibodies

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common difficult-to-treat condition where the goal, in the absence of disease-modifying treatments, is to alleviate symptoms such as pain and loss of function. Acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and opioids are common pharmacologic treatments for OA. Antibodies directed against nerve growth factor (NGF-Abs) are a new class of agents under clinical investigation for the treatment of OA. This narrative review describes (and uses schematics to visualize) nociceptive signaling, chronification of pain, and the mechanisms of action (MOAs) of these different analgesics in the context of OA-related pain pathophysiology. Further, the varying levels of efficacy and safety of these agents observed in patients with OA is examined, based on an overview of published clinical data and/or treatment guidelines (when available), in the context of differences in their MOAs.

Concern about addiction is associated with lower quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis: an exploratory, real-world data analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relationship between self-reported concerns about becoming addicted to a medication and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

This real-world study used patient-level cross-sectional survey data collected from the US Adelphi Disease Specific Programme (DSP). The DSP for OA selected 153 physicians who collected de-identified data on their next nine adult patients with OA. Each patient completed a disease-relevant survey, which included the Likert-scale question, "I am concerned about becoming addicted to my medicine," (CAA) with responses ranging from "completely disagree" [1] to "completely agree" [5]. HRQoL was measured by the EQ-5D-5L index value and the EQ Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A set of ordinary least squares regressions using HRQoL measures as outcomes and CAA as a continuous predictor were estimated. Standardized effect size (ES) was used to gauge the magnitude of effects.

RESULTS

A total of 866 patients with OA completed the survey (female, 61.2%; White, 77.7%; mean age, 64.2 years). Of the 775 patients who completed the CAA question, almost one-third responded that they "agree" (18%) or "completely agree" (11%), while 27% responded "completely disagree" and 20% "disagree." Regression analyses found that patients who have concerns about medication addiction have significantly different EQ-5D-5L index values and EQ VAS scores compared with patients who do not have this concern (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that concern about medication addiction in patients with OA may have an impact on patient HRQoL, with more concerned patients reporting poorer HRQoL outcomes.