Treatment of hip/knee osteoarthritis in Dutch general practice and physical therapy practice: an observational study

Background:  A multidisciplinary, guideline-based Stepped-Care-Strategy (SCS), has recently been developed to improve the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). To date, it is unknown to what extent current Dutch OA care is consistent with the SCS, both with respect to the content of care as well as the sequence of care. Furthermore, there is a lack of clarity regarding the role of different health care providers in the performance of OA care according to the SCS. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to describe the content of primary care in patients with hip/knee OA, including the compliance to the SCS and taking into account the introduction of patient self-referral to physical therapy. Methods:  Data were used from NIVEL Primary Care Database. In total, 12.118 patients with hip/knee OA who visited their GP or physical therapist were selected. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the content of care in GP-referred and self-referred patients to physical therapy. Results:  Content of care performed by GPs mostly concerned consultations, followed by NSAID prescriptions and referrals to secondary care. Both prescriptions of acetaminophen and referrals to physical therapy respectively dietary therapy were rarely mentioned. Nevertheless, still 65% of the patients in physical therapy practice were referred by their GP. Compared to GP-referred patients, self-referred patients more often presented recurrent complaints and were treated less often by activity-related exercise therapy. Education was rarely registered as singular intervention, neither in GP-referred nor in self-referred patients. Conclusion:  In accordance with the SCS, less advanced interventions are more often applied than more advanced interventions. To optimize the adherence to the SCS, GPs could reconsider the frequent use of NSAIDs instead of analgesics and the low referral rate to allied health care. Self-referral to physical therapy partially distorts both the low referral rate in general practice and the low application rate of education as singular intervention in physical therapy practice. Further research is recommended to evaluate the effects of task-shifting in OA care, taking into account the content of the SCS

Pain intensity, neck pain and longer duration of complaints predict poorer outcome in patients with shoulder pain - a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Shoulder complaints are common and have an unfavourable prognosis in many patients. Prognostic information is helpful for both patients and clinicians in managing the complaints. The research question was which factors have prognostic value on (un)favourable outcome in patients with shoulder complaints in primary care, secondary care and occupational settings. METHODS: Update of a systematic review in primary care, secondary care and occupational settings. RESULTS: Nine articles were published since the original review in 2004. Six were of high quality covering a wide variety of prognostic factors and outcome measures. Four studies were conducted in primary care settings. A best evidence synthesis, including the results of the previous systematic review on this topic shows that there is strong evidence that higher shoulder pain intensity, concomitant neck pain and a longer duration of symptoms predict poorer outcome in primary care settings. In secondary care populations, strong evidence was found for the association between greater disability and poorer outcome and between the existence of previous shoulder pain and poorer outcome. CONCLUSION: Clinicians may take these factors into account in the management of their patients. Those with a worse prognosis may be monitored more frequently and the treatment plan modified if complaints persist

Table_1_Barriers and facilitators for implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention in community-dwelling older adults: a scoping review.DOCX

BackgroundLifestyle 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.MethodA 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).ResultsThe 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.ConclusionA 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.</p

Table_2_Barriers and facilitators for implementation of a combined lifestyle intervention in community-dwelling older adults: a scoping review.docx

BackgroundLifestyle 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.MethodA 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).ResultsThe 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.ConclusionA 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.</p