Unstated factors in orthopaedic decision-making: a qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Total joint replacement (TJR) of the hip or knee for osteoarthritis is among the most common elective surgical procedures. There is some inequity in provision of TJR. How decisions are made about who will have surgery may contribute to disparities in provision. The model of shared decision-making between patients and clinicians is advocated as an ideal by national bodies and guidelines. However, we do not know what happens within orthopaedic practice and whether this reflects the shared model. Our study examined how decisions are made about TJR in orthopaedic consultations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study used a qualitative research design comprising semi-structured interviews and observations. Participants were recruited from three hospital sites and provided their time free of charge. Seven clinicians involved in decision-making about TJR were approached to take part in the study, and six agreed to do so. Seventy-seven patients due to see these clinicians about TJR were approached to take part and 26 agreed to do so. The patients' outpatient appointments ('consultations') were observed and audio-recorded. Subsequent interviews with patients and clinicians examined decisions that were made at the appointments. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Clinical and lifestyle factors were central components of the decision-making process. In addition, the roles that patients assigned to clinicians were key, as were communication styles. Patients saw clinicians as occupying expert roles and they deferred to clinicians' expertise. There was evidence that patients modified their behaviour within consultations to complement that of clinicians. Clinicians acknowledged the complexity of decision-making and provided descriptions of their own decision-making and communication styles. Patients and clinicians were aware of the use of clinical and lifestyle factors in decision-making and agreed in their description of clinicians' styles. Decisions were usually reached during consultations, but patients and clinicians sometimes said that treatment decisions had been made beforehand. Some patients expressed surprise about the decisions made in their consultations, but this did not necessarily imply dissatisfaction.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The way in which roles and communication are played out in decision-making for TJR may affect the opportunity for shared decisions. This may contribute to variation in the provision of TJR. Making the importance of these factors explicit and highlighting the existence of patients' 'surprise' about consultation outcomes could empower patients within the decision-making process and enhance communication in orthopaedic consultations.</p

Knee Arthroplasty: Disabilities in Comparison to the General Population and to Hip Arthroplasty Using a French National Longitudinal Survey

International audienceBACKGROUND: Knee arthroplasty is increasing exponentially due to the aging of the population and to the broadening of indications. We aimed to compare physical disability and its evolution over two years in people with knee arthroplasty to that in the general population. A secondary objective was to compare the level of disabilities of people with knee to people with hip arthroplasty. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 16,945 people representative of the French population were selected in 1999 from the French census and interviewed about their level of disability. This sample included 815 people with lower limb arthroplasty. In 2001, 608 of them were re-interviewed, among whom 134 had knee arthroplasty. Among the other participants re-interviewed, we identified 68 who had undergone knee arthroplasty and 145 hip arthroplasty within the last two years (recent arthroplasty). People with knee arthroplasty reported significantly greater difficulties than the general population with bending forward (odds ratio [OR] = 4.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7, 12.6), walking more than 500 meters (OR = 6.0; 95% CI: 1.5, 24.7) and carrying 5 kg kilograms for 10 meters (OR = 4.6; 95% CI: 1.3, 16.4). However, the two years evolution in disability was similar to that in the general population for most activities. The level of mobility was similar between people with recent knee arthroplasty and those with recent hip arthroplasty. Nevertheless, people with recent knee arthroplasty reported a lower level of disability than the other group for washing and bending forward (OR = 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.6 and OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.9, respectively). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: People with knee arthroplasty reported a higher risk of disability than the general population for common activities of daily living but a similar evolution. There was no relevant difference between recent knee and hip arthroplasties for mobility

An Exploratory Study of Primary Care Physician Decision Making Regarding Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: For patients to experience the benefits of total joint arthroplasty (TJA), primary care physicians (PCPs) ought to know when to refer a patient for TJA and/or optimize nonsurgical treatment options for osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of physicians to make clinical treatment decisions. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: A survey, using ten clinical vignettes, of PCPs in Indiana. MEASUREMENTS: A test score (range 0 to 10) was computed based on the number of correct answers consistent with published explicit appropriateness criteria for TJA. We also collected demographic characteristics and physicians’ perceived success rate of TJA in terms of pain relief and functional improvement. RESULTS: There were 149 PCPs (response rate = 61%) who participated. The mean test score was 6.5 ± 1.5. Only 17% correctly identified the published success rate of TJA (i.e., ≥90%). In multivariate analysis, the only physician-related variables associated with test score were ethnicity, board status, and perceived success rate of TJA. Physicians who were white (P = .001), board-certified (P = .04), and perceived a higher success rate of TJA (P = .004) had higher test scores. CONCLUSIONS: PCP knowledge with respect to guideline-concordant care for OA could be improved, specifically in deciding when to consider TJA versus optimizing nonsurgical options. Moreover, the perception of the success rate of TJA may influence a clinician’s decision making