RightPath: a model of community-based musculoskeletal care for children.

OBJECTIVES: Musculoskeletal (MSK) presentations are common (reported prevalence of one in eight children) and a frequent cause of consultations (6% of 7-year-olds in a cohort study from the UK). Many causes are self-limiting or raised as concerns about normal development (so-called normal variants). We aimed to describe a new model of care to identify children who might be managed in the community by paediatric physiotherapists and/or podiatrists rather than referral to hospital specialist services. METHODS: Using mixed methods, we tested the feasibility, acceptability and transferability of the model in two UK sites. Evaluation included patient flow, referral times, diagnosis and feedback (using questionnaires, focus groups and interviews). RESULTS: All general practitioner referrals for MSK presentations (in individuals <16 years of age) were triaged by nurses or allied health professionals using a triage guide; ∼25% of all MSK referrals were triaged to be managed by community-based paediatric physiotherapists/podiatrists, and most (67%) had a diagnosis of normal variants. Families reported high satisfaction, with no complaints or requests for onward specialist referral. No children re-presented to the triage service or with serious MSK pathology to hospital specialist services in the subsequent 6 months after triage. Triagers reported paediatric experience to be important in triage decision-making and case-based learning to be the preferred training format. CONCLUSION: The triage model is acceptable, feasible and transferable to enable appropriate care in the community for a proportion of children with MSK complaints. This is a multi-professional model of better working together between primary community and specialist providers.

Patients' views on the use of an Option Grid for knee osteoarthritis in physiotherapy clinical encounters: An interview study.

BACKGROUND: Patient decision support tools have been developed as a means of providing accurate and accessible information in order for patients to make informed decisions about their care. Option Grids™ are a type of decision support tool specifically designed to be used during clinical encounters. OBJECTIVE: To explore patients' views of the Option Grid encounter tool used in clinical consultations with physiotherapists, in comparison with usual care, within a patient population who are likely to be disadvantaged by age and low health literacy. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 72 patients (36 who had been given an Option Grid in their consultation and 36 who had not). Thematic analysis explored patients' understanding of treatment options, perceptions of involvement, and readability and utility of the Option Grid. RESULTS: Interviews suggested that the Option Grid facilitated more detailed discussion about the risks and benefits of a wider range of treatment options for osteoarthritis of the knee. Participants indicated that the Option Grid was clear and aided their understanding of a structured progression of the options as their condition advanced, although it was not clear whether the Option Grid facilitated greater engagement in shared decision making. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee was well received by patient participants who reported that it helped them to understand their options, and made the notion of choice explicit. Use of Option Grids should be considered within routine consultations.

Shared decision making in the UK: Moving towards wider uptake.

Shared decision making (SDM) is firmly on the policy agenda in the UK and a recent legal ruling has confirmed its importance. Policymakers, ethicists, professional regulators and societies, patient organisations and now the courts are committed to ensuring that SDM becomes the norm throughout the NHS, but an unfavourable economic climate makes this especially challenging. Considerable progress has been made over the last few years, with new learning from demonstration sites, various initiatives in capacity building and training, wider availability of patient decision aids, and important leadership initiatives. Enthusiasm for this way of working is growing among clinicians, patients and managers, but it could be undermined if SDM comes to be seen primarily as a means of cost control.

Supporting shared decision making using an Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee in an interface musculoskeletal clinic: A stepped wedge trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether introducing tools, specifically designed for use in clinical encounters, namely Option Grids, into a clinical practice setting leads to higher levels of shared decision making. METHODS: A stepped wedge trial design where 6 physiotherapists at an interface clinic in Oldham, UK, were sequentially instructed in how to use an Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee. Patients with suspected or confirmed osteoarthritis of the knee were recruited, six per clinician prior to instruction, and six per clinician afterwards. We measured shared decision making, patient knowledge, and readiness to decide. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were recruited; 36 were allocated to the intervention group. There was an 8.4 point (95% CI 4.4 to 12.2) increase in the Observer OPTION score (range 0-100) in the intervention group. The mean gain in knowledge was 0.9 points (score range 0-5, 95% CI, 0.3 to 1.5). There was no increase in encounter duration. CONCLUSION: Shared decision making increased when clinicians used the knee osteoarthritis Option Grid. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Tools designed to support collaboration and deliberation about treatment options lead to increased levels of shared decision making.

Option Grids to facilitate shared decision making for patients with Osteoarthritis of the knee: protocol for a single site, efficacy trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite policy interest, an ethical imperative, and evidence of the benefits of patient decision support tools, the adoption of shared decision making (SDM) in day-to-day clinical practice remains slow and is inhibited by barriers that include culture and attitudes; resources and time pressures. Patient decision support tools often require high levels of health and computer literacy. Option Grids are one-page evidence-based summaries of the available condition-specific treatment options, listing patients' frequently asked questions. They are designed to be sufficiently brief and accessible enough to support a better dialogue between patients and clinicians during routine consultations. This paper describes a study to assess whether an Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee (OA of the knee) facilitates SDM, and explores the use of Option Grids by patients disadvantaged by language or poor health literacy. METHODS/DESIGN: This will be a stepped wedge exploratory trial involving 72 patients with OA of the knee referred from primary medical care to a specialist musculoskeletal service in Oldham. Six physiotherapists will sequentially join the trial and consult with six patients using usual care procedures. After a period of brief training in using the Option Grid, the same six physiotherapists will consult with six further patients using an Option Grid in the consultation. The primary outcome will be efficacy of the Option Grid in facilitating SDM as measured by observational scores using the OPTION scale. Comparisons will be made between patients who have received the Option Grid and those who received usual care. A Decision Quality Measure (DQM) will assess quality of decision making. The health literacy of patients will be measured using the REALM-R instrument. Consultations will be observed and audio-recorded. Interviews will be conducted with the physiotherapists, patients and any interpreters present to explore their views of using the Option Grid. DISCUSSION: Option Grids offer a potential solution to the barriers to implementing traditional decision aids into routine clinical practice. The study will assess whether Option Grids can facilitate SDM in day-to-day clinical practice and explore their use with patients disadvantaged by language or poor health literacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN94871417.