The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research, or the Department of Health.
Health care provision for osteoarthritis: Concordance between what patients would like and what health professionals think they should have†
Article first published online: 29 JUN 2011
Copyright © 2011 by the American College of Rheumatology
Arthritis Care & Research
Volume 63, Issue 7, pages 963–972, July 2011
How to Cite
Mann, C. and Gooberman-Hill, R. (2011), Health care provision for osteoarthritis: Concordance between what patients would like and what health professionals think they should have. Arthritis Care Res, 63: 963–972. doi: 10.1002/acr.20459
- Issue published online: 29 JUN 2011
- Article first published online: 29 JUN 2011
- Accepted manuscript online: 8 MAR 2011 03:17PM EST
- Manuscript Accepted: 25 FEB 2011
- Manuscript Received: 2 DEC 2010
- North Bristol NHS Trust small grant scheme
- UK's National Institute for Health Research under its Programme Grants for Applied Research funding scheme. Grant Number: RP-PG-0407-10070
To explore the opinions of patients and health professionals about the provision of health care for people with osteoarthritis (OA) and possible service improvements.
Qualitative methods were used to explore the opinions of patients and health professionals about existing OA care and possible changes in service provision. Sixteen patients with hip or knee OA took part in focus groups, and 12 health professionals from primary and secondary care were interviewed. Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and anonymized. Transcripts were analyzed using the Framework method.
The views of the patients and health professionals generally concurred. They felt that OA should receive more attention and better consistency of care. More information and education about the condition, diet, exercise, aids, and resources was needed at the time of diagnosis. Patients wanted more time, better continuity, and proactive followup from general practitioners, with less variation in accessing joint replacement. Participants suggested access on demand to an “OA specialist” in primary care and the use of a management model comparable to other long-term conditions. Both patients and health professionals wanted better support for self-management to help patients manage their condition more effectively and appropriately.
Patients and health professionals perceived similar problems with OA care. More proactive care and improved information, especially for those with early OA, might achieve better outcomes. Access to a primary care OA specialist might provide better continuity of care, enable patients to meet their needs for information, support, and self-management, as well as improve appropriate referral to other resources.