Understanding knee ostheoarthritis from the patients' perspective : a qualitative study

Background: No studies of Health Coach Interventions for knee OA sufferers that include patients' perspectives have been published. The study assesses current clinical practice and primary care professionals' advice from the patients' perspective, in order to obtain a participative design for a complex intervention based on coaching psychology. Moreover, wants to analyse the experiences, perceptions, cognitive evaluation, values, emotions, beliefs and coping strategies of patients with knee osteoarthritis, and secondly the impact of these factors in the Self-management of this condition. Methods: It is an interpretative qualitative study. The study included patients with diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis (OA) from 4 primary health care centres in Barcelona. A theoretical sampling based on a prior definition of participants' characteristics was carried out. Ten semi-structured interviews with knee OA patients were carried out. A content thematic analysis was performed following a mixed-strategy text codification in Lazarus framework and in emerging codes from the data. Results: The results are structured in two blocks: Experiences and perceptions of informants and Experiences of knee osteoarthritis according to the Lazarus model. Regarding experiences and perceptions of informants: Some participants reported that the information was mostly provided by health professionals. Informants know which food they should eat to lose weight and the benefits of weight loss. Moreover, participants explained that they like walking but that sometimes it is difficult to put into practice. Regarding experiences of knee osteoarthritis according Lazarus model: Cognitive evaluation is influenced by cognitive distortions such as obligation, guilt, dramatization and catastrophism. Values: Family is the value most associated with wellbeing. Helping others is another recurring value. Emotions: Most participants explain that they feel anxiety, irritability or sadness. Beliefs: To some, physiotherapy helps them feel less pain. However, others explain that it is of no use to them. Participants are aware of the association overweight- pain. Coping strategies: The strategies for coping with emotions aim to reduce psychological distress (anxiety, sadness, anger) and some are more active than others. Conclusions: The study highlights that patients with knee osteoarthritis require a person-centered approach that provides them with strategies to overcome the psychological distress caused by this conditio

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a health coaching intervention to improve the lifestyle of patients with knee osteoarthritis : cluster randomized clinical trial

Background: The prevalence of osteoarthritis and knee osteoarthritis in the Spanish population is estimated at 17% and 10.2%, respectively. The clinical guidelines concur that the first line treatment for knee osteoarthritis should be non-pharmacological and include weight loss, physical activity and self-management of pain. Health Coaching has been defined as an intervention that facilitates the achievement of health improvement goals, the reduction of unhealthy lifestyles, the improvement of self-management for chronic conditions and quality of life enhancement. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a health coaching intervention on quality of life, pain, overweight and physical activity in patients from 18 primary care centres of Barcelona with knee osteoarthritis. Methods/Design: Methodology from the Medical Research Council on developing complex interventions. Phase 1: Intervention modelling and operationalization through a qualitative, socioconstructivist study using theoretical sampling with 10 in-depth interviews to patients with knee osteoarthritis and 4 discussion groups of 8-12 primary care professionals, evaluated using a sociological discourse analysis. Phase 2: Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility study with a community-based randomized clinical trial. Participants: 360 patients with knee osteoarthritis (180 in each group). Randomization unit: Primary Care Centre. Intervention Group: will receive standard care plus 20-hour health coaching and follow-up sessions. Control Group: will receive standard care. Main Outcome Variable: quality of life as measured by the WOMAC index. Data Analyses: will include standardized response mean and multilevel analysis of repeated measures. Economic analysis: based on cost-effectiveness and cost-utility measures. Phase 3: Evaluation of the intervention programme with a qualitative study. Methodology as in Phase 1. Discussion: If the analyses show the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the intervention the results can be incorporated into the clinical guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis in primary care

The Tilburg Frailty Indicator : A psychometric systematic review

Background: The Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) is one of the most prominent multidimensional frailty assessment instruments. This review aimed to critically appraise and summarise its measurement properties. Methods: Reports were eligible if they included results of studies aimed at developing the TFI or evaluating its measurement properties. We performed a literature search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases from their inception until December 8, 2021. We also searched grey literature databases. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the "COSMIN Risk of Bias". The measurement properties were evaluated using specific criteria. We graded the quality of the evidence using a GRADE approach. Results: Sixty-three studies were included. We found moderate sufficient evidence for TFI content validity, although it is still insufficient for the comprehensiveness of its items. TFI construct validity was based on sufficient evidence from two studies of its structural validity as well as multiple hypothesis-testing for construct validity studies with inconsistent results. We did not find any studies that assessed cross-cultural validity. Only one of TFI's three dimensions showed sufficient evidence for the internal consistency of its scores, and results in test-retest reliability were inconsistent. The TFI showed high sufficient concurrent validity with the comprehensive geriatric assessment. We identified several studies assessing its predictive validity for adverse frailty-related outcomes, although most of the evidence from these studies was insufficient. We did not find any studies that assessed the responsiveness of TFI scores. Conclusions: The TFI had evidence gaps in several relevant measurement properties. Further research is needed to strengthen its usefulness as a clinical decision-making tool