Changes to consultations and diagnosis of osteoarthritis in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: General practitioners (GP) are often the first medical professionals to treat musculoskeletal complaints. Yet the impact of COVID-19 on primary care utilisation for musculoskeletal complaints is largely unknown. This study quantifies the impact of the pandemic on primary care utilisation for musculoskeletal complaints and specifically osteoarthritis (OA) in the Netherlands. DESIGN: We extracted data on GP consultations in 2015-2020 from 118,756 patients over 45 years of age and estimated reductions in consultations in 2020 as compared to 5-year average. Outcomes were GP consultations for: any musculoskeletal complaints, knee and hip OA, knee and hip complaints, and newly diagnosed knee and hip OA/complaints. RESULTS: The relative reductions in consultations ranged from 46.7% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 43.9-49.3%) (all musculoskeletal consultations) to 61.6% (95% CI: 44.7-73.3%) (hip complaints) at the peak of the first wave, and from 9.3% (95% CI: 5.7-12.7%) (all musculoskeletal consultations) to 26.6% (95% CI: 11.5-39.1%) (knee OA) at the peak of the second wave. The reductions for new diagnoses were 87.0% (95% CI: 71.5-94.1%) for knee OA/complaints, and 70.5% (95% CI: 37.7-86.0%) for hip OA/complaints at the peak of the first wave, and not statistically significant at the peak of the second wave. CONCLUSION: We observed 47% reduction in GP consultations for musculoskeletal disorders during the first wave and 9% during the second wave. For hip and knee OA/complaints, the reductions were over 50% during the first, and 10% during the second wave. This disruption may lead to accumulation of patients with severe OA symptoms and more requests for arthroplasty surgery.

Effect of motion control versus neutral walking footwear on pain associated with lateral tibiofemoral joint osteoarthritis: a comparative effectiveness randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if motion control walking shoes are superior to neutral walking shoes in reducing knee pain on walking in people with lateral knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Participant-blinded and assessor-blinded, comparative effectiveness, superiority randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: People with symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral OA from the community and our volunteer database. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised to receive either motion control or neutral shoes and advised to wear them >6 hours/day over 6 months. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in average knee pain on walking over the previous week (11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), 0-10) at 6 months. The secondary outcomes included other measures of knee pain, physical function, quality of life, participant-perceived change in pain and function, and physical activity. RESULTS: We planned to recruit 110 participants (55 per arm) but ceased recruitment at 40 (n=18 motion control shoes, n=22 neutral shoes) due to COVID-19-related impacts. All 40 participants completed 6-month outcomes. There was no evidence that motion control shoes were superior to neutral shoes for the primary outcome of pain (mean between-group difference 0.4 NRS units, 95% CI -1.0 to 1.7) nor for any secondary outcome. The number of participants experiencing any adverse events was similar between groups (motion control shoes: n=5, 28%; neutral shoes: n=4, 18.2%) and were minor. CONCLUSIONS: Motion control shoes were not superior to neutral shoes in improving knee pain on walking in symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral joint OA. Further research is needed to identify effective treatments in this important but under-researched knee OA subgroup. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001864213.

Experiences of Health-Promoting Activities among Individuals with Knee Pain: The Halland Osteoarthritis Cohort.

Knee pain is an early sign of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and a risk factor for chronic widespread pain (CWP). Early prevention is vital, and more research is needed to understand health-promoting activities for individuals with knee pain from a patient perspective. This study aimed to explore how individuals with knee pain experienced health-promoting activities. Explorative qualitative design with inductive approach was applied to explore the experiences of 22 individuals (13 women, 9 men; median age: 52). Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed using latent qualitative content analysis. The results revealed health-promoting activities in individuals with knee pain and were interpreted in the overall theme, striving for balance in everyday life. Two categories explored the content in health-promoting activities: (1) Caring for the body-being physically active, having a healthy diet, and utilising support; and (2) Managing life stressors-allowing for recovery, promoting vitality, and safeguarding healthy relationships. In conclusion, individuals with knee pain described various health-promoting activities. They strived for balance in everyday life by caring for the body and managing life stressors. We suggest that a broader approach to everyday life can be helpful in treatment plans and health promotion to manage and prevent KOA and CWP, while striving for a healthy lifestyle.

Patients' and clinicians' experiences with stratified exercise therapy in knee osteoarthritis: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: We have developed a model of stratified exercise therapy that distinguishes three knee osteoarthritis (OA) subgroups ('high muscle strength subgroup', 'low muscle strength subgroup', 'obesity subgroup'), which are provided subgroup-specific exercise therapy (supplemented by a dietary intervention for the 'obesity subgroup'). In a large clinical trial, this intervention was found to be no more effective than usual exercise therapy. The present qualitative study aimed to explore experiences from users of this intervention, in order to identify possible improvements. METHODS: Qualitative research design embedded within a cluster randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting. A random sample from the experimental arm (i.e., 15 patients, 11 physiotherapists and 5 dieticians) was interviewed on their experiences with receiving or applying the intervention. Qualitative data from these semi-structured interviews were thematically analysed. RESULTS: We identified four themes: one theme regarding the positive experiences with the intervention and three themes regarding perceived barriers. Although users from all 3 perspectives (patients, physiotherapists and dieticians) generally perceived the intervention as having added value, we also identified several barriers, especially for the 'obesity subgroup'. In this 'obesity subgroup', physiotherapists perceived obesity as difficult to address, dieticians reported that more consultations are needed to reach sustainable weight loss and both physiotherapists and dieticians reported a lack of interprofessional collaboration. In the 'high muscle strength subgroup', the low number of supervised sessions was perceived as a barrier by some patients and physiotherapists, but as a facilitator by others. A final theme addressed barriers to knee OA treatment in general, with lack of motivation as the most prominent of these. CONCLUSION: Our qualitative study revealed a number of barriers to effective application of the stratified exercise therapy, especially for the 'obesity subgroup'. Based on these barriers, the intervention and its implementation could possibly be improved. Moreover, these barriers are likely to account at least partly for the lack of superiority over usual exercise therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands National Trial Register (NTR): NL7463 (date of registration: 8 January 2019).

Referrals for physical therapy for osteoarthritis during the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of musculoskeletal pain and disability among Americans. Physical therapy (PT) is recommended per the 2019 ACR /Arthritis Foundation Guideline for Treatment of OA of the Hand, Hip, and Knee. During COVID-19, access to healthcare has been altered in a variety of clinical settings, with the pandemic creating delays in healthcare, with an unknown impact on access to PT care for OA. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether referrals to PT for OA were reduced in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to 2019. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was done of 3586 PT referrals placed by the University of California, Davis for 206 OA ICD-10 codes from January to November 2019 and from January to November 2020. The numbers of PT referrals per month of each year were compared using both descriptive statistics and Poisson Regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1972 PT referrals for OA were placed from January to November 2019. Only 1614 referrals for OA were placed from January to November 2020, representing a significant decrease (p = 0.001). Month-by-month analysis of 2020 compared to 2019 revealed statistically significant drops in PT referrals for OA in April (p = 0.001), May (p = 0.001), and August (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal a significant reduction in the number of referrals for PT for OA placed in 2020 during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These reductions were particularly evident in the months following state-mandated actions and closures. Factors associated with this outcome may include decreased access to primary care providers, perceptions of PT availability by health care providers, decreased mobility limiting access to both clinic and PT appointments, and/or willingness to engage in PT by patients during the pandemic.

The EPIPHA-KNEE trial: Explaining Pain to target unhelpful pain beliefs to Increase PHysical Activity in KNEE osteoarthritis - a protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial with clinical- and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite well-established benefits of physical activity for knee osteoarthritis (OA), nine of ten people with knee OA are inactive. People with knee OA who are inactive often believe that physical activity is dangerous, fearing that it will further damage their joint(s). Such unhelpful beliefs can negatively influence physical activity levels. We aim to evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of integrating physiotherapist-delivered pain science education (PSE), an evidence-based conceptual change intervention targeting unhelpful pain beliefs by increasing pain knowledge, with an individualised walking, strengthening, and general education program. METHODS: Two-arm, parallel-design, multicentre randomised controlled trial involving 198 people aged ≥50 years with painful knee OA who do not meet physical activity guideline recommendations or walk regularly for exercise. Both groups receive an individualised physiotherapist-led walking, strengthening, and OA/activity education program via 4x weekly in-person treatment sessions, followed by 4 weeks of at-home activities (weekly check-in via telehealth), with follow-up sessions at 3 months (telehealth) and 5 and 9 months (in-person). The EPIPHA-KNEE group also receives contemporary PSE about OA/pain and activity, embedded into all aspects of the intervention. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Primary outcomes are physical activity level (step count; wrist-based accelerometry) and self-reported knee symptoms (WOMAC Total score) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, pain intensity, global rating of change, self-efficacy, pain catastrophising, depression, anxiety, stress, fear of movement, knee awareness, OA/activity conceptualisation, and self-regulated learning ability. Additional measures include adherence, adverse events, blinding success, COVID-19 impact on activity, intention to exercise, treatment expectancy/perceived credibility, implicit movement/environmental bias, implicit motor imagery, two-point discrimination, and pain sensitivity to activity. Cost-utility analysis of the EPIPHA-KNEE intervention will be undertaken, in addition to evaluation of cost-effectiveness in the context of primary trial outcomes. DISCUSSION: We will determine whether the integration of PSE into an individualised OA education, walking, and strengthening program is more effective than receiving the individualised program alone. Findings will inform the development and implementation of future delivery of PSE as part of best practice for people with knee OA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12620001041943 (13/10/2020).