Patients' and practitioners' views of knee osteoarthritis and its management: a qualitative interview study.

Interlis, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.
PLoS ONE (Impact Factor: 3.73). 01/2011; 6(5):e19634. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019634
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To identify the views of patients and care providers regarding the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to reveal potential obstacles to improving health care strategies.
We performed a qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews of a stratified sample of 81 patients (59 women) and 29 practitioners (8 women, 11 general practitioners [GPs], 6 rheumatologists, 4 orthopedic surgeons, and 8 [4 GPs] delivering alternative medicine).
Two main domains of patient views were identified: one about the patient-physician relationship and the other about treatments. Patients feel that their complaints are not taken seriously. They also feel that practitioners act as technicians, paying more attention to the knee than to the individual, and they consider that not enough time is spent on information and counseling. They have negative perceptions of drugs and a feeling of medical uncertainty about OA, which leads to less compliance with treatment and a switch to alternative medicine. Patients believe that knee OA is an inevitable illness associated with age, that not much can be done to modify its evolution, that treatments are of little help, and that practitioners have not much to propose. They express unrealistic fears about the impact of knee OA on daily and social life. Practitioners' views differ from those of patients. Physicians emphasize the difficulty in elaborating treatment strategies and the need for a tool to help in treatment choice.
This qualitative study suggests several ways to improve the patient-practitioner relationship and the efficacy of treatment strategies, by increasing their acceptability and compliance. Providing adapted and formalized information to patients, adopting more global assessment and therapeutic approaches, and dealing more accurately with patients' paradoxal representation of drug therapy are main factors of improvement that should be addressed.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To enhance guideline-based non-surgical management of hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA), a multidisciplinary, stepped-care strategy has been implemented in primary care in a region of the Netherlands. To facilitate this implementation, the self-management booklet "Care for Osteoarthritis" was developed and introduced. The aim of the booklet was to educate patients about OA, to enhance the patient's active role in the treatment course, and to improve the communication with health care providers. To successfully introduce the booklet on a large scale we assessed barriers and facilitators for patients to using this booklet. Seventeen primary care patients with hip or knee OA who received the self-management booklet participated in this qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to ensure diversity of the patients' view about the booklet. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Three core themes with patient perceived barriers and facilitators to use the booklet emerged from the interviews: 1) the role of health care providers, 2) the patient's perceptions about OA and its manageability, and 3) the patient's perceptions about the usefulness of the booklet and patient's information needs. Regarding the first theme, a barrier was the lack of encouragement from health care providers to use the booklet in the treatment course of OA. Moreover, patients had doubts concerning the health care providers' endorsement of non-surgical treatment for OA. Barriers from the second theme were: thinking that OA is not treatable or that being pro-active during the treatment course is not important. In contrast, being convinced about the importance of an active participation in the treatment course was a facilitator. Third, patients' perceptions about the usefulness of the booklet and patients' information needs were both identified as barriers as well as facilitators for booklet use. This study contributes to the understanding of patient perceived barriers and facilitators to use a self-management booklet in the treatment course of OA. The results offer practical starting points to tailor the implementation activities of the booklet nationwide and to introduce comparable educational tools in OA primary care or in other chronic diseases.
    BMC Family Practice 12/2013; 14(1):181. · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper determines the perceptions of people diagnosed with osteoarthritis towards their conservative management strategies. A systematic review of the published (AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, SportsDisc, MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry, PubMed) and unpublished/trial registry databases (WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Current Controlled Trials, the United States National Institute of Health Trials Registry, NIHR Clinical Research Portfolio Database) searched from their inception to July 2013. Eligible studies included those which presented the attitudes or perceptions of people with osteoarthritis towards non-operative management strategies. Study quality was appraised using the CASP and the Gough's weight of evidence appraisal tools. Data were analysed through a meta-ethnography approach. Thirty-three studies including 1,314 people with osteoarthritis were sampled; the majority diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis. The overarching themes indicated people with osteoarthritis delay their diagnosis, opting for self-management and informal information gathering. This informal rather than health professional-led guidance is sought and maintained as an important resource throughout the care of this population and is valued. Diagnosis is sought at a 'critical point'. Healthcare interventions largely provided are poorly perceived. The period of subsequent self-management is an expectation before the inevitable requirement for joint replacement. There remains uncertainty regarding when this is required, but the expected failure of conservative treatment to manage pain and symptoms is common. In conclusion, patients should be enthused towards the principles of self-management and clinicians should not trivialise osteoarthritis. This may provide a more valuable perception of non-operative management to promote its adoption and adherence in managing osteoarthritis.
    Rheumatology International 12/2013; · 2.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common cause of disability and consultation with a GP. However, little is known about what currently happens when patients with OA consult their GP. This review aims to compare existing literature reporting patient experiences of consultations in which OA is discussed with GP attitudes and beliefs regarding OA, in order to identify any consultation events that may be targeted for intervention. After a systematic literature search, a narrative review has been conducted of literature detailing patient experiences of consulting with OA in primary care and GP attitudes to, and beliefs about, OA. Emergent themes were identified from the extracted findings and GP and patient perspectives compared within each theme. Twenty two relevant papers were identified. Four themes emerged: diagnosis; explanations; management of the condition; and the doctor-patient relationship. Delay in diagnosis is frequently reported as well as avoidance of the term osteoarthritis in favour of 'wear and tear'. Both patients and doctors report negative talk in the consultation, including that OA is to be expected, has an inevitable decline and there is little that can be done about it. Pain management appears to be a priority for patients, although a number of barriers to effective management have been identified. Communication within the doctor patient consultation also appears key, with patients reporting a lack of feeling their symptoms were legitimised. The nature of negative talk and discussions around management within the consultation have emerged as areas for future research. The findings are limited by generic limitations of interview research; to further understanding of the OA consultation alternative methodology such as direct observation may be necessary.
    BMC Family Practice 03/2014; 15(1):46. · 1.61 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 21, 2014