Health professionals and students encounter multi-level barriers to implementing high-value osteoarthritis care: a multi-national study.

OBJECTIVE: Consistent evidence-practice gaps in osteoarthritis (OA) care are observed in primary care settings globally. Building workforce capacity to deliver high-value care requires a contemporary understanding of barriers to care delivery. We aimed to explore barriers to OA care delivery among clinicians and students. DESIGN: A cross-sectional, multinational study sampling clinicians (physiotherapists, primary care nurses, general practitioners (GPs), GP registrars; total possible denominator: n = 119,735) and final-year physiotherapy and medical students (denominator: n = 2,215) across Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Respondents answered a survey, aligned to contemporary implementation science domains, which measured barriers to OA care using categorical and free-text responses. RESULTS: 1886 clinicians and 1611 students responded. Items within the domains 'health system' and 'patient-related factors' represented the most applicable barriers experienced by clinicians (25-42% and 20-36%, respectively), whereas for students, 'knowledge and skills' and 'patient-related factors' (16-24% and 19-28%, respectively) were the most applicable domains. Meta-synthesis of qualitative data highlighted skills gaps in specific components of OA care (tailoring exercise, nutritional/overweight management and supporting positive behaviour change); assessment, measurement and monitoring; tailoring care; managing case complexity; and translating knowledge to practice (especially among students). Other barriers included general infrastructure limitations (particularly related to community facilities); patient-related factors (e.g., beliefs and compliance); workforce-related factors such as inconsistent care and a general knowledge gap in high-value care; and system and service-level factors relating to financing and time pressures, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and students encounter barriers to delivery of high-value OA care in clinical practice/training (micro-level); within service environments (meso-level); and within the health system (macro-level).

Interventions for the prevention and management of neck/upper extremity musculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review.

Considered from medical, social or economic perspectives, the cost of musculoskeletal injuries experienced in the workplace is substantial, and there is a need to identify the most efficacious interventions for their effective prevention, management and rehabilitation. Previous reviews have highlighted the limited number of studies that focus on upper extremity intervention programmes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the findings of primary, secondary and/or tertiary intervention studies for neck/upper extremity conditions undertaken between 1999 and 2004 and to compare these results with those of previous reviews. Relevant studies were retrieved through the use of a systematic approach to literature searching and evaluated using a standardised tool. Evidence was then classified according to a "pattern of evidence" approach. Studies were categorised into subgroups depending on the type of intervention: mechanical exposure interventions; production systems/organisational culture interventions and modifier interventions. 31 intervention studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings provided evidence to support the use of some mechanical and modifier interventions as approaches for preventing and managing neck/upper extremity musculoskeletal conditions and fibromyalgia. Evidence to support the benefits of production systems/organisational culture interventions was found to be lacking. This review identified no single-dimensional or multi-dimensional strategy for intervention that was considered effective across occupational settings. There is limited information to support the establishment of evidence-based guidelines applicable to a number of industrial sectors.