Dataset Information

Feasibility and potential effectiveness of a non-pharmacological multidisciplinary care programme for persons with generalised osteoarthritis: a randomised, multiple-baseline single-case study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a 12-week, non-pharmacological multidisciplinary intervention in patients with generalised osteoarthritis (GOA).

Design

A randomised, concurrent, multiple-baseline single-case design. During the baseline period, the intervention period and the postintervention period, all participants completed several health outcomes twice a week on Visual Analogue Scales.

Setting

Rheumatology outpatient department of a specialised hospital in the Netherlands.

Participants

1 man and four women (aged 51-76 years) diagnosed with GOA.

Primary outcome measures

To assess feasibility, the authors assessed the number of dropouts and adverse events, adherence rates and patients' satisfaction.

Secondary outcome measures

To assess the potential effectiveness, the authors assessed pain and self-efficacy using visual data inspection and randomisation tests.

Results

The intervention was feasible in terms of adverse events (none) and adherence rate but not in terms of participants' satisfaction with the intervention. Visual inspection of the data and randomisation testing demonstrated no effects on pain (p=0.93) or self-efficacy (p=0.85).

Conclusions

The results of the present study indicate that the proposed intervention for patients with GOA was insufficiently feasible and effective. The data obtained through this multiple-baseline study have highlighted several areas in which the therapy programme can be optimised.

SUBMITTER: Hoogeboom TJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3401828 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Feasibility and potential effectiveness of a non-pharmacological multidisciplinary care programme for persons with generalised osteoarthritis: a randomised, multiple-baseline single-case study.

Hoogeboom Thomas J TJ Kwakkenbos Linda L Rietveld Leonie L den Broeder Alfons A AA de Bie Rob A RA van den Ende Cornelia H M CH

BMJ open 20120719 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of a 12-week, non-pharmacological multidisciplinary intervention in patients with generalised osteoarthritis (GOA).<h4>Design</h4>A randomised, concurrent, multiple-baseline single-case design. During the baseline period, the intervention period and the postintervention period, all participants completed several health outcomes twice a week on Visual Analogue Scales.<h4>Setting</h4>Rheumatology outpatient department of a ...[more]

PMID: 22815466

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlmost half of the stroke patients admitted to geriatric rehabilitation has persisting problems after discharge. Currently, there is no evidence based geriatric rehabilitation programme available for older stroke patients, combining inpatient rehabilitation with adequate ambulatory aftercare in the community. Therefore, we developed an integrated multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme that includes aftercare for older persons with stroke. We evaluated the effectiveness of this newly developed rehabilitation programme in comparison to usual care.MethodsA multicentre randomised controlled trial was conducted in eight geriatric rehabilitation stroke units and their collaborating partners in primary care. The study population involved stroke patients and their informal caregivers who were aged 65 or over, living in the community before admission to geriatric rehabilitation, and expected to be able to return home after discharge. The programme consisted of three modules: inpatient neurorehabilitation, home-based self-management training, and stroke education. For patients, daily activity (FAI) was assessed as primary outcome and functional dependence (Katz-15), perceived quality of life (SSQoL) and social participation (IPA) as secondary outcomes. Additionally, among informal caregivers perceived care burden (self-rated burden VAS), objective care burden (Erasmus iBMG), and quality of life (CarerQol), were assessed as secondary outcomes.ResultsIn total 190 patients and 172 informal caregivers were included. Mean age of the patients in the intervention group was 78.9 years (SD = 7.0) and in the usual care group 79.0 years (SD = 6.5). Significant favourable effects for the programme were observed for the subscale autonomy outdoors of the IPA (- 2.15, P = .047, and for the informal caregivers perceived care burden (1.23, P = .048. For the primary outcome daily activity and the other secondary outcomes, no significant effects were observed.ConclusionThe integrated multidisciplinary programme had no effect on daily activity of older stroke patients. However, patients participating in the programme had a higher level of perceived autonomy of outdoor activities and their informal caregivers perceived a lower care burden. The programme might be promising in providing adequate (after) care, although adaptation of the programme is recommended to increase its feasibility and improve its effects.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN62286281 . Registered 19-3-2010.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent progressive musculoskeletal disorder, leading to pain and disability. Patient information and education are considered core elements in treatment guidelines for OA; however, there is to our knowledge no evidence-based recommendation on the best approach, content or length on educational programmes in OA. OBJECTIVE: to develop a brief, patient oriented disease specific multidisciplinary education programme (MEP) to enhance self-management in patients with OA. METHOD: Twelve persons (80% female mean age 59 years) diagnosed with hand, hip or knee OA participated in focus group interviews. In the first focus group, six participants were interviewed about their educational needs, attitudes and expectations for the MEP. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and thereafter condensed.Based on results from focus group interviews, current research evidence, clinical knowledge and patients' experience, a multidisciplinary OA team (dietist, nurse, occupational therapist, pharmacist, physical therapist and rheumatologist) and a patient representative developed a pilot-MEP after having attended a work-shop in health pedagogics. Finally, the pilot-MEP was evaluated by a second focus group consisting of four members from the first focus group and six other experienced patients, before final adjustments were made. RESULTS: The focus group interviews revealed four important themes: what is OA, treatment options, barriers and coping strategies in performing daily activities, and how to live with osteoarthritis. Identified gaps between patient expectations and experience with the pilot-programme were discussed and adapted into a final MEP. The final MEP was developed as a 3.5 hour educational programme provided in groups of 6-9 patients. All members from the multidisciplinary team are involved in the education programme, including a facilitator who during the provision of the programme ensures that the individual questions are addressed. As part of an ongoing process, a patient representative regularly attends the MEP and gives feedback concerning content and perceived value. CONCLUSION: A MEP has been developed to enhance self-management in patients with OA attending a multidisciplinary OA outpatient clinic. The effectiveness of the MEP followed by individual consultations with members of the multidisciplinary team is currently evaluated in a randomised controlled trial with respect to patient satisfaction and functioning.

Project description:BackgroundIn hospital settings, delirium affects as many as 50% of older patients, aggravating their symptoms and worsening their condition, and therefore increasing the risk of in-hospital complications and death. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of structured, non-pharmacological care, delivered to older hospitalised patients by trained volunteers (students of medical fields), on the reduction of incidence of adverse health-related outcomes.Methods/designThis trial will be a randomised, investigator-blind, controlled trial conducted in an internal medicine and geriatric ward in Poland. We aim to include 416 patients who are 70 years of age and have been hospitalised for medical reasons. Eligible patients will be randomised 1:1 to receive structured, non-pharmacological care delivered by students of medicine, psychology and nursing, together with standard medical treatment or standard medical care alone. The protocol of interventions has been designed to cover nine main risk factors for delirium, with the scope of multidisciplinary interventions being individualised and tailored. The protocol will be aimed at immobilisation, vision and hearing impairment, cognitive impairment and disorientation, stress and anxiety, sleep-wake cycle disturbances, dehydration and malnutrition, and pain. A structured evaluation of patients' cognition, mood, anxiety and functional performance is planned to be carried out twice, on the day of group allocation and at discharge; structured screening assessment for delirium will be conducted daily using the Confusion Assessment Method. The primary outcome will be the incidence of delirium in hospital; secondary outcomes will be in-hospital changes in cognition, mood and anxiety, and functional status, occurrence of falls and death.DiscussionDelirium prevention programmes are being introduced worldwide. A particular novelty of our project, however, is that invitations for voluntary work with older patients at risk for delirium will be addressed to medical students. With the use of the service learning method, the students will shape their attitudes, increase their knowledge and understanding of hospital care, and master competencies to work within interdisciplinary teams, which establishes the originality and practicality of the project.Trial registrationPolish Science Database, 317484 . Registered on 23 October 2016.

Project description:Background and objectiveOsteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent, disabling disease requiring chronic management that is associated with an enormous individual and societal burden. This systematic review provides a global cost-effectiveness evaluation of pharmacological therapy for the management of OA.MethodsFollowing Center for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidance, a literature search strategy was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation database (NHS EED) to identify original articles containing cost-effectiveness evaluation of OA pharmacological treatment published before 4 November 2021. Risk of bias was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for economic evaluations. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used to assess the reporting quality of included articles.ResultsDatabase searches identified 43 cost-effectiveness analysis studies (CEAs) on pharmacological management of OA that were conducted in 18 countries and four continents, with one study containing multiple continents. A total of four classes of drugs were assessed, including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioid analgesics, symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs), and intra-articular (IA) injections. The methodological approaches of these studies showed substantial heterogeneity. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) were (in 2021 US dollars) US$44.40 to US$307,013.56 for NSAIDS, US$11,984.84 to US$128,028.74 for opioids, US$10,930.17 to US$27,799.73 for SYSADOAs, and US$258.36 to US$58,447.97 for IA injections in different continents. The key drivers of cost effectiveness included medical resources, productivity, relative risks, and selected comparators.ConclusionThis review showed substantial heterogeneity among studies, ranging from a finding of dominance to very high ICERs, but most studies found interventions to be cost effective based on specific ICER thresholds. Important challenges in the analysis were related to the standardization and methodological quality of studies, as well as the presentation of results.

Project description:BackgroundFall incidents are the third cause of chronic disablement in elderly according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Recent meta-analyses shows that a multifactorial falls risk assessment and management programmes are effective in all older population studied. However, the application of these programmes may not be the same in all National health care setting and, consequently, needs to be evaluated by cost-effectiveness studies before to plan this intervention in regular care. In Italy structured collaboration between hospital staff and primary care is generally lacking and the role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in a fall prevention programme at home has never been explored.Methods and designThis will be a two-group randomised controlled trial aiming to evaluate the effects of a home-based intervention programme delivered by a multidisciplinary health team. The home tele-management programme, previously adopted in our Institute for chronic patients, will be proposed to elderly people affected by chronic diseases at high risk of falling at hospital discharge. The programme will involve the hospital staff and will be managed thanks to the collaboration between hospital and primary care setting. Patients will be followed for 6 months after hospital discharge. A nurse-tutor telephone support and tele-exercise will characterize the intervention programme. People in the control group will receive usual care. The main outcome measure of the study will be the percentage of patients sustaining a fall during the 6-months follow-up period. An economic evaluation will be performed from a societal perspective and will involve calculating cost-effectiveness and cost utility ratios.DiscussionTo date, no adequately powered studies have investigated the effect of the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in a home fall prevention program. We aim the program will be feasible in terms of intensity and characteristics, but particularly in terms of patient and provider compliance. The results of the economic evaluation could provide information about the cost-effectiveness of the intervention and the effects on quality of life. In case of shown effectiveness and cost effectiveness, the program could be implemented into health services settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02487589 ).

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited information on the costs and benefits of alternative adjunct non-pharmacological treatments for knee osteoarthritis and little guidance on which should be prioritised for commissioning within the NHS. This study estimates the costs and benefits of acupuncture, braces, heat treatment, insoles, interferential therapy, laser/light therapy, manual therapy, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, pulsed electrical stimulation, pulsed electromagnetic fields, static magnets and transcutaneous electrical nerve Stimulation (TENS), based on all relevant data, to facilitate a more complete assessment of value.MethodsData from 88 randomised controlled trials including 7,507 patients were obtained from a systematic review. The studies reported a wide range of outcomes. These were converted into EQ-5D index values using prediction models, and synthesised using network meta-analysis. Analyses were conducted including firstly all trials and secondly only trials with low risk of selection bias. Resource use was estimated from trials, expert opinion and the literature. A decision analytic model synthesised all evidence to assess interventions over a typical treatment period (constant benefit over eight weeks or linear increase in effect over weeks zero to eight and dissipation over weeks eight to 16).ResultsWhen all trials are considered, TENS is cost-effective at thresholds of £20-30,000 per QALY with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,690 per QALY vs. usual care. When trials with a low risk of selection bias are considered, acupuncture is cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £13,502 per QALY vs. TENS. The results of the analysis were sensitive to varying the intensity, with which interventions were delivered, and the magnitude and duration of intervention effects on EQ-5D.ConclusionsUsing the £20,000 per QALY NICE threshold results in TENS being cost-effective if all trials are considered. If only higher quality trials are considered, acupuncture is cost-effective at this threshold, and thresholds down to £14,000 per QALY.

Dataset Information

Feasibility and potential effectiveness of a non-pharmacological multidisciplinary care programme for persons with generalised osteoarthritis: a randomised, multiple-baseline single-case study.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Primary outcome measures

Secondary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Feasibility and potential effectiveness of a non-pharmacological multidisciplinary care programme for persons with generalised osteoarthritis: a randomised, multiple-baseline single-case study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets