Implementing a structured model for osteoarthritis care in primary healthcare: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Author summary Why was this study done? Hip and knee osteoarthritis is a common chronic joint disease in the adult population causing significant pain and disability. Non-surgical treatment modalities including patient osteoarthritis education, exercise therapy, and weight management represent core treatments recommended in professional guidelines. However, they are currently underutilised in people with hip and knee osteoarthritis. It is not established to what extent a structured osteoarthritis care model can change this and improve the quality of care. What did the researchers do and find? A cluster-randomised trial was conducted to compare a structured osteoarthritis care model with usual care with respect to appropriate care delivery in people with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Forty general practitioners and 37 physiotherapists working in primary care attended workshops to get an update on recommendations for osteoarthritis care and were trained in the core elements of the structured care model: osteoarthritis education in groups, an individually tailored 8- to 12-week exercise programme, and a dietary intervention, if needed. Of the 393 patient participants, 284 were allocated to the intervention group and 109 to the usual care group. At 6 months, patient-reported quality of care and satisfaction with care were greater, more patients were referred to physiotherapy and fewer to orthopaedic surgeons, and more patients fulfilled physical activity criteria in the intervention group as compared to the usual care group. What do these findings mean? A structured osteoarthritis care model provided by trained primary care general practitioners and physiotherapists resulted in the provision of osteoarthritis care that was more in line with current care recommendations and in higher patient-reported quality of care and satisfaction as compared to usual care. A structured and well-planned approach, in line with evidence-based treatment recommendations for hip and knee osteoarthritis and executed in primary care, has the potential to improve patients’ health and reduce disability. In doing so, it may also reduce the risk of sick leave and may thereby reduce the direct and indirect costs of osteoarthritis for the individual and the society. Although a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial design is appropriate to conduct an effectiveness study in a clinical practice setting, strategies to prevent selection bias and differences in recruitment rates in the control and intervention periods are needed

The population genomic legacy of the second plague pandemic

SummaryHuman populations have been shaped by catastrophes that may have left long-lasting signatures in their genomes. One notable example is the second plague pandemic that entered Europe in ca. 1,347 CE and repeatedly returned for over 300 years, with typical village and town mortality estimated at 10%–40%.1 It is assumed that this high mortality affected the gene pools of these populations. First, local population crashes reduced genetic diversity. Second, a change in frequency is expected for sequence variants that may have affected survival or susceptibility to the etiologic agent (Yersinia pestis).2 Third, mass mortality might alter the local gene pools through its impact on subsequent migration patterns. We explored these factors using the Norwegian city of Trondheim as a model, by sequencing 54 genomes spanning three time periods: (1) prior to the plague striking Trondheim in 1,349 CE, (2) the 17th–19th century, and (3) the present. We find that the pandemic period shaped the gene pool by reducing long distance immigration, in particular from the British Isles, and inducing a bottleneck that reduced genetic diversity. Although we also observe an excess of large FST values at multiple loci in the genome, these are shaped by reference biases introduced by mapping our relatively low genome coverage degraded DNA to the reference genome. This implies that attempts to detect selection using ancient DNA (aDNA) datasets that vary by read length and depth of sequencing coverage may be particularly challenging until methods have been developed to account for the impact of differential reference bias on test statistics.Results and discussion STAR★Method

The population genomic legacy of the second plague pandemic

Human populations have been shaped by catastrophes that may have left long-lasting signatures in their genomes. One notable example is the second plague pandemic that entered Europe in ca. 1,347 CE and repeatedly returned for over 300 years, with typical village and town mortality estimated at 10%–40%.1 It is assumed that this high mortality affected the gene pools of these populations. First, local population crashes reduced genetic diversity. Second, a change in frequency is expected for sequence variants that may have affected survival or susceptibility to the etiologic agent (Yersinia pestis).2 Third, mass mortality might alter the local gene pools through its impact on subsequent migration patterns. We explored these factors using the Norwegian city of Trondheim as a model, by sequencing 54 genomes spanning three time periods: (1) prior to the plague striking Trondheim in 1,349 CE, (2) the 17th–19th century, and (3) the present. We find that the pandemic period shaped the gene pool by reducing long distance immigration, in particular from the British Isles, and inducing a bottleneck that reduced genetic diversity. Although we also observe an excess of large FST values at multiple loci in the genome, these are shaped by reference biases introduced by mapping our relatively low genome coverage degraded DNA to the reference genome. This implies that attempts to detect selection using ancient DNA (aDNA) datasets that vary by read length and depth of sequencing coverage may be particularly challenging until methods have been developed to account for the impact of differential reference bias on test statistics.publishedVersio

The population genomic legacy of the second plague pandemic

Human populations have been shaped by catastrophes that may have left long-lasting signatures in their genomes. One notable example is the second plague pandemic that entered Europe in ca. 1,347 CE and repeatedly returned for over 300 years, with typical village and town mortality estimated at 10%-40%.1 It is assumed that this high mortality affected the gene pools of these populations. First, local population crashes reduced genetic diversity. Second, a change in frequency is expected for sequence variants that may have affected survival or susceptibility to the etiologic agent (Yersinia pestis).2 Third, mass mortality might alter the local gene pools through its impact on subsequent migration patterns. We explored these factors using the Norwegian city of Trondheim as a model, by sequencing 54 genomes spanning three time periods: (1) prior to the plague striking Trondheim in 1,349 CE, (2) the 17th-19th century, and (3) the present. We find that the pandemic period shaped the gene pool by reducing long distance immigration, in particular from the British Isles, and inducing a bottleneck that reduced genetic diversity. Although we also observe an excess of large FST values at multiple loci in the genome, these are shaped by reference biases introduced by mapping our relatively low genome coverage degraded DNA to the reference genome. This implies that attempts to detect selection using ancient DNA (aDNA) datasets that vary by read length and depth of sequencing coverage may be particularly challenging until methods have been developed to account for the impact of differential reference bias on test statistics

EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee osteoarthritis

Introduction: Hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) are increasingly common with a significant impact on individuals and society. Non-pharmacological treatments are considered essential to reduce pain and improve function and quality of life. EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee OA were published in 2013. Given the large number of subsequent studies, an update is needed.Methods: The Standardised Operating Procedures for EULAR recommendations were followed. A multidisciplinary Task Force with 25 members representing 14 European countries was established. The Task Force agreed on an updated search strategy of 11 research questions. The systematic literature review encompassed dates from 1 January 2012 to 27 May 2022. Retrieved evidence was discussed, updated recommendations were formulated, and research and educational agendas were developed.Results: The revised recommendations include two overarching principles and eight evidence-based recommendations including (1) an individualised, multicomponent management plan; (2) information, education and self-management; (3) exercise with adequate tailoring of dosage and progression; (4) mode of exercise delivery; (5) maintenance of healthy weight and weight loss; (6) footwear, walking aids and assistive devices; (7) work-related advice and (8) behaviour change techniques to improve lifestyle. The mean level of agreement on the recommendations ranged between 9.2 and 9.8 (0–10 scale, 10=total agreement). The research agenda highlighted areas related to these interventions including adherence, uptake and impact on work.Conclusions: The 2023 updated recommendations were formulated based on research evidence and expert opinion to guide the optimal management of hip and knee OA

Clinical Outcomes Of Osteoarthritis Management Programs: A Project Of The Oa Trial Bank And Oarsi Joint Effort Initiative Using Individual Participant Data

Purpose: People living with osteoarthritis (OA) often do not receive best evidence care. Coordinated OA management programs (OAMPs) have been implemented to address this global evidence-practice gap. An OAMP is defined as a package of care with the following: i) a personalized management plan; ii) with reassessment and progression; iii) using a minimum of 2 core treatments (education, exercise, weight control), and; iv) optional adjunctive therapies. Existing OAMP models differ in treatment mode, intensity, duration, the health professionals delivering care, and the healthcare systems and settings they operate within. Randomized trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assess the outcomes of different OAMPs, however, these models are unlikely to ever be compared in RCTs due to the huge expense and complicated logistics required. Prognosis research provides another method of comparing outcomes of different OAMP models. This study aimed to estimate the pain and self-reported function outcomes (at 12-, 26- and 52-weeks) of people with hip and/or knee OA who participated in international OAMPs. It also aimed to describe the characteristics of OAMP participants.Methods: This study was undertaken by members of the OARSI Joint Effort Initiative (JEI), in collaboration with the OA Trial Bank (Erasmus MC, Netherlands). RCTs and clinical cohorts assessing OAMPs were identified through the JEI membership and literature searches. Eligible studies included data from an ongoing OAMP, in any real-world setting, with participants who were diagnosed with hip or knee OA, and longitudinal measures of patient-reported pain and function. The investigators of eligible studies were invited to complete data delivery agreements with the OA Trial Bank, share individual participant data (IPD), contribute to study design and authorship. Investigators ensured they had local ethics review board approval to contribute IPD to the OA Trial bank. Each dataset was converted to a common format to enable merging into one dataset. The IPD were evaluated to convert pain and function variables to standardized scales as appropriate. Pain scores were converted to a 0-100 point scale (100 worst). Function scores were converted to a 0-100 point scale (100 best). A generalized estimating equations (GEE) model analysis was performed to assess the change in pain and function from baseline across weeks 12, 26, and 52. The model specification was based on an unstructured correlation structure and robust standard errors. Pain and function estimates were adjusted by age, sex and body mass index (BMI). Data analyses were carried out using Stata 15 (StataCorp 2015) and SPSS 17.Results: The investigators of 13 international OAMPs were invited to take part. IPD from 9 OAMPs were delivered: the OA Chronic Care Program, Ramsay Health OA Management Program, Joint Health Program, University of Wisconsin Health Knee and Hip Comprehensive Non-Surgical OA Management Clinic, Improved Management of Patients With Hip and Knee OA in Primary Health Care, Joint Academy, Amsterdam OA cohort, Management of OA In Consultations, and Collaborative model of care between Orthopaedics and allied healthcare professionals in knee OA. The characteristics of the OAMPs are summarised in table 1. The OAMPs were conducted in-person except for the Joint Academy that was implemented as an online OAMP. Individual participant data from 9819 participants were analyzed. The cohort studies were missing large amounts of data, as expected in clinical practice. The characteristics of OAMP participants are summarised in Table 2. The majority of OAMP participants reported the knee as their index joint, their mean age ranged between 62- 67 years, 58-74% were female, 25-48% were working and mean BMI indicated they were overweight at baseline. Pain was most commonly assessed using a Numeric Rating Scale or validated questionnaires e.g. the Knee Injury and OA Outcome Scale (KOOS). Function was mostly assessed using validated questionnaires such as the KOOS. The pain and fuction measured in the original datasets are reported in Table 1. The changes in pain and function of the OAMP participants from baseline across weeks 12, 26, and 52 are summarised in Table 3. There were reductions in pain scores and improvements in function scores seen across all programs at the majority of timepoints.Conclusions: We established the first data bank of IPD from different international OAMPs. Analysis of the IPD demonstrated modest improvements in pain and function across the programs at all timepoints. The most rapid improvements were made by week-12, however, these gains were maintained at week-52. In future work this project will use IPD meta-analysis to identify prognostic factors of people with OA who participate in OAMPs.</p

Implementing international osteoarthritis treatment guidelines in primary health care: study protocol for the SAMBA stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial

Background Previous research indicates that people with osteoarthritis (OA) are not receiving the recommended and optimal treatment. Based on international treatment recommendations for hip and knee OA and previous research, the SAMBA model for integrated OA care in Norwegian primary health care has been developed. The model includes physiotherapist (PT) led patient OA education sessions and an exercise programme lasting 8–12 weeks. This study aims to assess the effectiveness, feasibility, and costs of a tailored strategy to implement the SAMBA model. Methods/design A cluster randomized controlled trial with stepped wedge design including an effect, process, and cost evaluation will be conducted in six municipalities (clusters) in Norway. The municipalities will be randomized for time of crossover from current usual care to the implementation of the SAMBA model by a tailored strategy. The tailored strategy includes interactive workshops for general practitioners (GPs) and PTs in primary care covering the SAMBA model for integrated OA care, educational material, educational outreach visits, feedback, and reminder material. Outcomes will be measured at the patient, GP, and PT levels using self-report, semi-structured interviews, and register based data. The primary outcome measure is patient-reported quality of care (OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire) at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include referrals to PT, imaging, and referrals to the orthopaedic surgeon as well as participants’ treatment satisfaction, symptoms, physical activity level, body weight, and self-reported and measured lower limb function. The actual exposure to the tailor made implementation strategy and user experiences will be measured in a process evaluation. In the economic evaluation, the difference in costs of usual OA care and the SAMBA model for integrated OA care will be compared with the difference in health outcomes and reported by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Discussion The results from the present study will add to the current knowledge on tailored strategies, which aims to improve the uptake of evidence-based OA care recommendations and improve the quality of OA care in primary health care. The new knowledge can be used in national and international initiatives designed to improve the quality of OA care. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT0233365