Search

Objective: To investigate the association of OA risk factors with number of painful joint sites in a representative population sample., Methods: Analysis of the 2009 Survey on Living with Chronic Diseases in Canada - Arthritis Component (n = 1614) for respondents reporting symptomatic OA. Variables: painful joints sites (hands, wrists, elbows, shoulders, hips, knees, ankles, feet, back, neck), joint symptom duration, sociodemographic characteristics, smoking, comorbidities and BMI. Zero-truncated negative binomial regressions were used to investigate the association between number of painful joint sites and the variables. Generalizability of findings was assessed by a similar analysis in a clinical hip/knee OA sample., Results: The sample comprised 73% women and 56% were aged <65 years. The mean number of painful joint sites was 3.8: 84% reported pain at ≥2 sites, and 45% at ≥4 sites. Age, BMI, education and smoking were not associated with the number of joint sites. Significant associations were found with being female [rate ratio (RR) = 1.23, 95% CI 1.09, 1.39], having more comorbidities (RR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.07, 1.15) and longer symptom duration (RR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.09, 1.24), although the increase in joint sites with duration was small. Similar regression results were found with the clinical OA sample., Conclusion: The lack of an association of age and BMI (obesity) with number of painful joint sites in OA raises questions about the role of these risk factors and our understanding of OA as a multi-joint disease. Filling this knowledge gap is critical to making progress with defining OA phenotypes and identifying potential aetiological mechanisms., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Background: There is currently no standardized method for measuring functional status in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients, despite that it is one of the top priorities when determining eligibility for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the current investigation was to identify factors associated with discordance between individual self-report and performance-based measures of function for obese and non-obese men and women with knee OA., Methods: In a cohort of 727 knee OA patients scheduled for TKA, physical function prior to surgery was assessed with the self-reported physical function subscale of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC-pf), and the performance-based Timed Up and Go (TUG). Data on sociodemographic characteristics, health status, knee pain intensity, symptomatic joint site count, and pain catastrophizing were collected via questionnaire. The primary outcome was the difference in rescaled score between a participant's self-report and performance-based measures of function. Multivariable linear regression stratified by sex and obesity status was used to identify factors associated with discordance., Results: The mean age of participants was 65.5 years and 55% were women. With younger age, self-reported scores indicated increasingly worse function compared to performance-based scores, regardless of sex or obesity status. Among non-obese individuals, greater knee pain intensity was associated with a participant's self-report score indicating increasingly worse function compared to their performance-based score. For obese women, pain catastrophizing, and number of symptomatic joints were also associated with discordance as was reporting fewer comorbidities., Conclusions: Physical function may be differentially represented by self-reported and performance-based measures depending on a variety of patient factors. Our findings add to the evidence which suggests both measures should be used when assessing functional status prior to TKA., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: RG reports personal fees from Depuis Synthase, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no competing interests. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Objectives: Chronic conditions and multimorbidity are increasing worldwide. Yet, understanding longitudinal changes in multimorbidity over the lifecourse is limited. We compared the age-trajectory of multimorbidity by birth cohort and examined effects of socio-demographic (e.g., sex, income) and behavioral risk (e.g., obesity) factors in multimorbidity., Methods: Using data from the Canadian Longitudinal National Population Health Survey (1994-2010), we examined 10,186 participants born 1925-1974 grouped in 5 birth cohorts. Data on the number of chronic conditions (up to 17), income, education, and behavioral risk factors were collected biannually. We used multilevel logistic growth modeling techniques for analyses of multimorbidity defined as the presence of 2+ chronic conditions versus 1 or none., Results: We found significant cohort differences in the age-trajectory of multimorbidity: at corresponding ages, each succeeding recent cohort had higher odds of reporting multimorbidity than their predecessors. Access to healthcare did not fully explain these differences. Women, having lower income, being obese, smoking, and a sedentary lifestyle had increased odds of reporting multimorbidity. Obese individuals, particularly Gen Xers and younger boomers, reported multimorbidity at an earlier age than those of normal weight. We observed divergent trajectories of greater multimorbidity for lower than higher income individuals. Furthermore, after accounting for age and risk factors there was an apparent increase in reporting multimorbidity over time (period effect) across all ages., Discussion: Our findings indicate that multimorbidity is not only becoming the norm, but is emerging earlier in the lifecourse and particularly for low income and obese individuals from more recent cohorts. The findings point to the importance of planning interventions and policies to deal with more recent birth cohorts entering into older age with worse health than their predecessors.

Objective: To investigate cohort effects in arthritis prevalence across 4 birth cohorts: World War II (born 1935-1944), older and younger baby boomers (born 1945-1954 and 1955-1964, respectively), and Generation X (born 1965-1974), and to determine whether birth cohort effects in arthritis prevalence were associated with differences in risk factors over time or period effects., Methods: Analysis of biannually collected data from the longitudinal Canadian National Population Health Survey, 1994-2011 (n = 8,817 at baseline). Data included self-reported arthritis diagnosed by a health professional, risk factors (years of education, household income, smoking, physical activity, sedentary behavior, body mass index [BMI]), and survey year as an indicator of period. We used hierarchical age-period-cohort analyses to compare the age trajectory of arthritis by birth cohort and to examine the contribution of changes in risk factors and period to cohort differences., Results: More recent cohorts had successively a greater prevalence of arthritis. Risk factors were significantly associated with arthritis prevalence independently of cohort differences. The effects of increasing education and income over time on potentially reducing the arthritis prevalence were almost counter-balanced by effects of increasing BMI. Significant cohort-BMI and age-BMI interactions indicated an earlier age of arthritis onset for obese individuals than those of normal weight., Conclusion: Projections that only take into account the changing age structure of the population may underestimate future trends. Our understanding of the impact of BMI on arthritis is likely an underestimate. Cohort differences focus attention on the need to target arthritis management education to young and middle-aged adults., (© 2017, American College of Rheumatology.)

Unlabelled: POLICY POINTS: Despite beliefs that baby boomers are healthier than previous generations, we found no evidence that the health of baby boomers is substantially different from that of the previous or succeeding cohorts. The effects of increased education, higher income, and lower smoking rates on improving self-rated health were nearly counterbalanced by the adverse effect of increasing body mass index (BMI). Assumptions that baby boomers will require less health care as they age because of better education, more prosperity, and less propensity to smoke may not be realized because of increases in obesity., Context: Baby boomers are commonly believed to be healthier than the previous generation. Using self-rated health (SRH) as an indicator of health status, this study examines the effects of age, period, and birth cohort on the trajectory of health across 4 generations: World War II (born between 1935 and 1944), older baby boomers (born between 1945 and 1954), younger baby boomers (born between 1955 and 1964), and Generation X (born between 1965 and 1974)., Methods: We analyzed Canada's longitudinal National Population Health Survey 1994-2010 (n = 8,570 at baseline), using multilevel growth models to estimate the age trajectory of SRH by cohort, accounting for period and incorporating the influence of changes in education, household income, smoking status, and body mass index (BMI) on SRH over time., Findings: SRH worsened with increasing age in all cohorts. Cohort differences in SRH were modest (p = 0.034), but there was a significant period effect (p = 0.002). We found marked cohort effects for increasing education, income, and BMI, and decreasing smoking from the youngest to the oldest cohorts, which were much reduced (education and smoking) or removed (income and BMI) once period was taken into account. At the population level, multivariable analysis showed the benefits of increasing education and income and declines in smoking on the trajectory of improving SRH were almost counterbalanced by the effects of increasing BMI (obesity)., Conclusions: We found no evidence to support the expectation that baby boomers will age more or less healthily than previous cohorts did. We also found that increasing BMI has likely undermined improvements in health that might have otherwise occurred, with possible implications for the need for health care. Period effects had a more profound effect than birth cohort effects. This suggests that interventions to improve health, such as reducing obesity, can be targeted to the entire, or a major portion of the, population and need not single out particular birth cohorts., (© 2015 Milbank Memorial Fund.)

Objective: To compare directly the prevalence and risk factors for arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitations (AAL) between the US and Canada, and to estimate the population attributable risk percentage (PAR%) for obesity and leisure time physical inactivity., Methods: We conducted analyses of the 2002-2003 Joint Canada/US Health Survey, which asked about health professional-diagnosed arthritis, and arthritis reported as a cause of disability in specified activities of daily living. We used log-Poisson regression to obtain prevalence ratios for arthritis and AAL, adjusting for education, income, having a regular doctor, physical inactivity, and obesity. PAR% for obesity and physical inactivity were calculated., Results: The estimated crude prevalence of arthritis and AAL were 18.7% and 9.3%, respectively, in the US and 16.9% and 7.4%, respectively, in Canada. Being American was a significant bivariate predictor of arthritis and AAL, but not after adjustment for obesity and physical inactivity. PAR% for obesity were 14% and 20% for arthritis and AAL, respectively, for Americans and 13% and 17%, respectively, for Canadians, and for physical inactivity were 15% and 21%, respectively, for Americans and 4% and 5%, respectively, for Canadians, with estimates being higher among women., Conclusion: The higher prevalence of arthritis and AAL in the US may be accounted for by the higher prevalence of obesity and physical inactivity, particularly in women. The high PAR% related to obesity in both countries, and physical inactivity in the US, point to the importance of public health initiatives to reduce obesity and increase physical activity to reduce the prevalence of arthritis and AAL.

Study Design: Cross-sectional population-level health survey.Objective: To describe the frequency of co-occurring conditions with back pain; to identify risk factors for back pain controlling for co-occurring conditions; and to examine the association between back pain and individual co-occurring conditions.Summary Of Background Data: Back pain shares risk factors with a range of other conditions. Most studies have considered risk factors for back pain without taking into account the potential influence of co-occurring conditions.Methods: Analysis of the 2013 Canadian Community Health Survey (n = 61,854, age ≥15 yr). Back pain status and co-occurring conditions were determined from questions about long-term health conditions diagnosed by a health profession. Multivariable log-Poisson regression analysis was used to assess the adjusted association of back pain with demographic and lifestyle characteristics and co-occurring conditions.Results: The population prevalence of reported back pain was 19.3%. Most (71%) reported at least one co-occurring condition. Most frequently reported were arthritis (35%), high blood pressure (26%), migraine (18%), and mood disorders (14%). Following the addition of co-occurring condition count to the regression model, being female and being overweight/obese were no longer significantly associated with back pain, and the associations with ages 45 to 54 years and older, low-income, smoking, and being physical inactive were significantly attenuated. The highest prevalence ratio, 3.32 (95% confidence interval: 3.06-3.59), was for 3+ co-occurring conditions. In multivariable regression all but a few individual chronic conditions remained significant associated with back pain.Conclusion: Established risk factors for back pain may be largely a reflection of shared risk factors with co-occurring conditions. The high frequency of co-occurring conditions likely reflects diverse mechanisms related to heterogeneity of back pain. The extent of association of co-occurring conditions with back pain has implications for clinical management and need for further research to characterize subgroups.Level Of Evidence: 2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is growing. However the factors contributing to changes over time and to birth cohort differences in CAM use are not well understood. Setting: We used data from 10186 participants, who were aged 20–69 years at the first cycle of data collection in the longitudinal component of the Canadian National Population Health Survey (1994/95-2010/11). We examined chiropractic and other practitioner-based CAM use with a focus on five birth cohorts: pre-World War II (born 1925–1934); World War II (born 1935–1944); older baby boomers (born 1945–1954); younger baby boomers (born 1955–1964); and Gen Xers (born 1965–1974). The survey collected data every two years on predisposing (e.g., sex, education), enabling (e.g., income), behavior-related factors (e.g., obesity), need (e.g., chronic conditions), and use of conventional care (primary care and specialists). Results: The findings suggest that, at corresponding ages, more recent cohorts reported greater CAM (OR = 25.9, 95% CI: 20.0; 33.6 for Gen Xers vs. pre-World War) and chiropractic use than their predecessors (OR = 2.2, 95% CI: 1.7; 2.8 for Gen Xers vs. pre-World War). There was also a secular trend of increasing CAM use, but not chiropractic use, over time (period effect) across all ages. Factors associated with cohort differences were different for CAM and chiropractic use. Cohort differences in CAM use were partially related to a period effect of increasing CAM use over time across all ages while cohort differences in chiropractic use were related to the higher prevalence of chronic conditions among recent cohorts. The use of conventional care was positively related to greater CAM use (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.6; 2.0) and chiropractic use (OR = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1; 1.4) but did not contribute to changes over time or to cohort differences in CAM and chiropractic use. Conclusion: The higher CAM use over time and in recent cohorts could reflect how recent generations are approaching their healthcare needs by expanding conventional care to include CAM therapies and practice for treatment and health promotion. The findings also underscore the importance of doctors discussing CAM use with their patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]