Dataset Information

Barriers to Effective Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Treatment: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Practitioners' Views.

ABSTRACT: Only a minority of patients at high risk for osteoporotic fracture receive treatment.Study patients' and physicians' views regarding postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) to identify impediments to good care.A qualitative study involving 18 physicians and 37 women (age 57-87) with PMO.All women interviewed considered PMO to be somewhat normal wear-and-tear associated with old age. The women identified a large number of "causes" for osteoporosis but finally viewed it as chance. They all described its progression as slow. Three representations of PMO severity were identified: some women tended to interpreted it as benign (21), others tended to dramatize it (11), and the rest were uncertain (5). These representations did not appear linked to age or fracture. Even the women who associated fracture and PMO were uncertain of the link between them. Fractures were considered to be random events, independent of osteoporosis. Women received general life-style recommendations from their physicians positively, but did not connect them specifically to osteoporosis. Indeed, these recommendations, along with the fear of side effects, the absence of tangible results of treatments, the view of PMO as a natural process, and the representations of PMO severity are factors that may deter treatments and impact compliance. As for the physicians, they identified eight risk factors, recognizing menopause as central to PMO and recognized the link between risk of fracture and PMO. However, some considered the impact of fractures to be limited in time, and viewed PMO as a "benign" disease. Seeing the progression of PMO as slow and inevitable reduced their urgency to diagnose and treat it as compared to other diseases. Some physicians acknowledged limited mastery of the existing therapeutic arsenal and unsuccessful handling of patient compliance.Women's and physicians' perspectives on PMO converged to trivialize postmenopausal osteoporosis and thus disqualify it as a legitimate disease. A better understanding of women's and physicians' views, practices, and concerns related to PMO can improve osteoporosis management.

SUBMITTER: Alami S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4927112 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers to Effective Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Treatment: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Practitioners' Views.

Alami Sophie S Hervouet Lucile L Poiraudeau Serge S Briot Karine K Roux Christian C

PloS one 20160629 6

<h4>Background</h4>Only a minority of patients at high risk for osteoporotic fracture receive treatment.<h4>Objective</h4>Study patients' and physicians' views regarding postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) to identify impediments to good care.<h4>Methods</h4>A qualitative study involving 18 physicians and 37 women (age 57-87) with PMO.<h4>Results</h4>All women interviewed considered PMO to be somewhat normal wear-and-tear associated with old age. The women identified a large number of "causes" for ...[more]

PMID: 27355576

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:The TITRATE trial seeks to test whether intensive management is valuable in achieving disease remission in moderately active rheumatoid arthritis. Intensive management is a complex intervention consisting of: 1) 12 x monthly appointments, 2) tailored 'treatment support' based on motivational interviewing techniques, 3) optimised medication (including the opportunity for biologics), 4) provision of a Patient Handbook, and 5) shared treatment planning. This study aims to understand: a) patients' and practitioners' views on the feasibility and acceptability of intensive management, and b) patients' and practitioners' experience of receiving/providing intensive management. Methods:A qualitative study, nested within a randomised controlled trial. Participants were patients (n =?15) in the intensive management arm of the trial and rheumatology practitioners (n =?16) providing the intensive management intervention, from 18/42 clinics across England. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews and analysed using thematic analysis and iterative categorization. Results:Monthly appointments were largely acceptable to both groups who cited several treatment benefits (e.g. regular review of medication, practitioners built close relationships with patients). Practitioners were 'fairly confident' using the motivational interviewing techniques. Learning to pace was the most commonly reported self-management technique that patients and healthcare professionals worked on together, followed by gaining control over pain and fatigue. Practitioners liked having the option to offer biologics to patients with moderate RA. Most patients found the optimised medication (following monthly joint assessment) helpful and side-effects experienced were resolved. Variation existed in the extent to which patients engaged with the Patient Handbook and shared treatment planning, with those who did engage doing so in the early stages. Conclusions:Feedback from patient participants about the intensive management intervention was positive. They found increased medication helpful. Continuity of care with the same healthcare professional at regular intensive management sessions, and the treatment support provided, were highly rated. Feedback from practitioners indicated that intensive management training is feasible. Evidence from the interviews showed that some practitioners applied motivational interviewing techniques during standard care appointments and they would like the opportunity to address lifestyle issues with patients.

Project description:The STarT Back stratified primary care approach has demonstrated clinical and cost effectiveness in the UK, and is commonly used by General Practitioners (GPs). However, it remains unknown how this approach could be implemented into the German healthcare system. The aim of this study was therefore to explore the views and perceptions of German GPs in respect to using a stratified primary care for low back pain (LBP).A 90-minute think-tank workshop was conducted with 14 male and five female GPs, during which the STarT-Back-Screening-Tool (SBST) and related research evidence was presented. This was followed by two focus groups, based on a semi-structured interview guideline to identify potential implementation barriers and opportunities. Discussions were audiotaped, transcribed and coded using a content analysis approach.For the three deductively developed main themes, 15 subthemes emerged: (1) application of the SBST, with the following subthemes: which health profession should administer it, patients known to the GP practice, the reason for the GP consultation, scoring the tool, the tool format, and the anticipated impact on GP practice; (2) psychologically informed physiotherapy, with subthemes including: provision by a physiotherapist, anticipated impact, the skills of physiotherapists, management of patients with severe psychosocial problems, referral and remuneration; (3) the management of low-risk patients, with subthemes including: concern about the appropriate advising health professional, information and media, length of consultation, and local exercise venues.The attitudes of GPs towards stratified primary care for LBP indicated positive support for pilot-testing in Germany. However, there were mixed reactions to the ability of German physiotherapists to manage high-risk patients and handle their complex clinical needs. GPs also mentioned practical difficulties in providing extended advice to low-risk patients, which nevertheless could be addressed by involvement of specifically trained medical assistants.

Dataset Information

Barriers to Effective Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Treatment: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Practitioners' Views.

Publications

Barriers to Effective Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Treatment: A Qualitative Study of Patients' and Practitioners' Views.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets