Search

Trishna Rathod-Mistry,1 George Peat,2,3 Tuhina Neogi,4 Martin J Thomas2,5 1Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; 2Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK; 3Centre for Applied Health & Social Care Research (CARe), Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK; 4Department of Medicine, Section of Rheumatology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 5Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, Haywood Hospital, Staffordshire, UKCorrespondence: Martin J Thomas, Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK, Tel +44 1782 734874, Fax +44 1782 734719, Email m.thomas@keele.ac.ukObjective: To evaluate bias and precision of exposure-outcome effect estimates from three control sampling strategies in a case-crossover study.Methods: Online case-crossover study investigating eight physical activity-related triggers for acute flares in knee osteoarthritis. Exposures were measured in hazard periods (≤ 24 hours before self-declared flare onset). Control period exposure was measured in three ways: (1) four scheduled questionnaires over 13-weeks, (2) “usual” physical activity levels ascertained at baseline, (3) over three days before flare onset. Derived odds ratios, 95% confidence intervals and standard errors were compared.Results: Of 744 participants (mean age 62.1 [SD 10.2] years; 61% female), 493 reported 714 flares. Selecting controls from scheduled questionnaires, independent of hazard periods, yielded predominantly odds ratios in the expected direction (exposure “a lot” versus exposure “not at all”, range: 0.57– 3.22). When controls were sampled at baseline (range: 0.01– 1.42) or immediately before a flare (range: 0.30– 1.27) most odds ratio estimates were inverted. Standard errors of the log odds ratios were smallest when controls were sampled from scheduled questionnaires (range: 0.264– 0.473) compared to controls sampled at baseline (range: 0.267– 0.589) or immediately before a flare (range: 0.319– 0.621).Conclusion: Our findings are sensitive to control sample selection. Under certain conditions, different patterns could be attributed to over reporting and social desirability bias, where people may want to present themselves more positively about their “usual” physical activity levels, at baseline. Exposure measurement at the time of a flare may be less precise and more susceptible to recall bias due to systematically reporting exposures differently during a flare, compared to control measurement independent of flares.Keywords: osteoarthritis, flare, pain, case-crossover, sampling, knee

Objectives (1) Present deprescribing experiences of patients living with frailty, their informal carers and healthcare professionals; (2) interpret whether their experiences are reflective of person-centred/collaborative care; (3) complement our findings with existing evidence to present a model for person-centred deprescribing for patients living with frailty, based on a previous collaborative care model. Methods Qualitative design in English primary care (general practice). Semi-structured interviews were undertaken immediately post-deprescribing and 5/6 weeks later with nine patients aged 65+ living with frailty and three informal carers of patients living with frailty. Fourteen primary care professionals with experience in deprescribing were also interviewed. In total, 38 interviews were conducted. A two-staged approach to data analysis was undertaken. Key findings Three themes were developed: attitudes, beliefs and understanding of medicines management and responsibility; attributes of a collaborative, person-centred deprescribing consultation; organisational factors to support person-centred deprescribing. Based on these findings and complementary to existing evidence, we offer a model for person-centred deprescribing for patients living with frailty. Conclusions Previous models of deprescribing for patients living with frailty while, of value, do not consider the contextual factors that govern the implementation and success of models in practice. In this paper, we propose a novel person-centred model for deprescribing for people living with frailty, based on our own empirical findings, and the wider evidence base.

In older people living with frailty, polypharmacy can lead to preventable harm like adverse drug reactions and hospitalization. Deprescribing is a strategy to reduce problematic polypharmacy. All stakeholders should be actively involved in developing a person-centred deprescribing process that involves shared decision-making.To co-design an intervention, supported by a logic model, to increase the engagement of older people living with frailty in the process of deprescribing.Experience-based co-design is an approach to service improvement, which uses service users and providers to identify problems and design solutions. This was used to create a person-centred intervention with the potential to improve the quality and outcomes of the deprescribing process. A 'trigger film' showing older people talking about their healthcare experiences was created and facilitated discussions about current problems in the deprescribing process. Problems were then prioritized and appropriate solutions were developed. The review located the solutions in the context of current processes and procedures. An ideal care pathway and a complex intervention to deliver better care were developed.Older people living with frailty, their informal carers and professionals living and/or working in West Yorkshire, England, UK. Deprescribing was considered in the context of primary care.The current deprescribing process differed from an ideal pathway. A complex intervention containing seven elements was required to move towards the ideal pathway. Three of these elements were prototyped and four still need development. The complex intervention responded to priorities about (a) clarity for older people about what was happening at all stages in the deprescribing process and (b) the quality of one-to-one consultations.Priorities for improving the current deprescribing process were successfully identified. Solutions were developed and structured as a complex intervention. Further work is underway to (a) complete the prototyping of the intervention and (b) conduct feasibility testing.Older people living with frailty (and their informal carers) have made a central contribution, as collaborators, to ensure that a complex intervention has the greatest possible potential to enhance the experience of deprescribing medicines.

Benchtop NMR spectrometers provide a promising alternative to high-field NMR for applications that are limited by instrument size and/or cost. 19F benchtop NMR is attractive due to the larger chemical shift range of 19F relative to 1H and the lack of background signal in most applications. However, practical applications of benchtop 19F NMR are limited by its low sensitivity due to the relatively weak field strengths of benchtop NMR spectrometers. Here we present a sensitivity-enhancement strategy that combines SABRE (Signal Amplification By Reversible Exchange) hyperpolarization with the multiplet refocusing method SHARPER (Sensitive, Homogeneous, And Resolved PEaks in Real time). When applied to a range of fluoropyridines, SABRE-SHARPER achieves overall signal enhancements of up to 5700-fold through the combined effects of hyperpolarization and line-narrowing. This approach can be generalized to the analysis of mixtures through the use of a selective variant of the SHARPER sequence, selSHARPER. The ability of SABRE-selSHARPER to simultaneously boost sensitivity and discriminate between two components of a mixture is demonstrated, where selectivity is achieved through a combination of selective excitation and the choice of polarization transfer field during the SABRE step.

Involving research users in setting priorities for research is essential to ensure the outcomes are patient-centred and\ud maximise its value and impact. The Musculoskeletal Disorders Research Advisory Group Versus Arthritis led a\ud research priority setting exercise across musculoskeletal disorders. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative\ud (CHNRI) method of setting research priorities with a range of stakeholders was used, involving four stages and two\ud surveys, to: (1) gather research uncertainties, (2) consolidate these, (3) score uncertainties against importance and\ud impact, and (4) analyse scoring for prioritisation. 213 people responded to the first survey and 285 people to the\ud second, representing clinicians, researchers, and people with musculoskeletal disorders. Key priorities included\ud developing and testing new treatments, better treatment targeting, early diagnosis, prevention, and better\ud understanding and management of pain, with an emphasis on understanding underpinning mechanisms. We\ud present a call to action to researchers and funders to target these priorities.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common debilitating injury that can cause instability of the knee. We aimed to investigate the best management strategy between reconstructive surgery and non-surgical treatment for patients with a non-acute ACL injury and persistent symptoms of instability. Methods: We did a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial in 29 secondary care National Health Service orthopaedic units in the UK. Patients with symptomatic knee problems (instability) consistent with an ACL injury were eligible. We excluded patients with meniscal pathology with characteristics that indicate immediate surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer to either surgery (reconstruction) or rehabilitation (physiotherapy but with subsequent reconstruction permitted if instability persisted after treatment), stratified by site and baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score—4 domain version (KOOS4). This management design represented normal practice. The primary outcome was KOOS4 at 18 months after randomisation. The principal analyses were intention-to-treat based, with KOOS4 results analysed using linear regression. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN10110685, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02980367. Findings: Between Feb 1, 2017, and April 12, 2020, we recruited 316 patients. 156 (49%) participants were randomly assigned to the surgical reconstruction group and 160 (51%) to the rehabilitation group. Mean KOOS4 at 18 months was 73·0 (SD 18·3) in the surgical group and 64·6 (21·6) in the rehabilitation group. The adjusted mean difference was 7·9 (95% CI 2·5–13·2; p=0·0053) in favour of surgical management. 65 (41%) of 160 patients allocated to rehabilitation underwent subsequent surgery according to protocol within 18 months. 43 (28%) of 156 patients allocated to surgery did not receive their allocated treatment. We found no differences between groups in the proportion of intervention-related complications. Interpretation: Surgical reconstruction as a management strategy for patients with non-acute ACL injury with persistent symptoms of instability was clinically superior and more cost-effective in comparison with rehabilitation management. Funding: The UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Objective: To compare the sensitivity of alternative case finding approaches for the identification of foot osteoarthritis (OA) based on the La Trobe radiographic atlas. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of 533 adults age ≥50 years with foot pain in the past year. Weightbearing dorsoplantar (DP) and lateral radiographs were taken of both feet. The La Trobe radiographic atlas was used to document the presence of osteophytes (OPs) and joint space narrowing (JSN). The prevalence of OA in each joint was documented using both views and features in combination (as recommended in the original atlas), and by using a single view (DP or lateral only) and a single feature (OP or JSN only). Results: Compared to the recommended case definition based on OPs and JSN using both views, a DP-only view identified between 15% and 77% of OA cases, while a lateral-only view identified between 28% and 97% of OA cases. Compared to the recommended case definition of using both features, using only OPs identified between 46% and 94% of OA cases, while using only JSN identified between 19% and 76% of OA cases. Conclusion: Applying the La Trobe radiographic atlas but using only 1 radiograph view (DP or lateral) or 1 feature (OP or JSN) in isolation misses a substantial number of OA cases, and the sensitivity of these approaches varies considerably between different foot joints. These findings indicate that, where possible, the atlas should be administered according to the original description to avoid under-ascertainment of radiographic foot OA.

Dahai Yu,1 Matthew Missen,1 Kelvin P Jordan,1 John J Edwards,1 James Bailey,1 Ross Wilkie,1 Justine Fitzpatrick,2 Nuzhat Ali,2 Paul Niblett,2 George Peat1 1Primary Care Centre versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK; 2Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, Department of Health and Social Care, London, UKCorrespondence: Dahai Yu, Email d.yu@keele.ac.ukPurpose: To compare estimates of annual person-consulting incidence and prevalence of low back pain (LBP) and osteoarthritis for two national English electronic health record databases (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum and CPRD GOLD).Patients and Methods: Retrospective, population-based, longitudinal cohort study. LBP and osteoarthritis cases were defined using established codelists in people aged ≥ 15 and ≥ 45 years, respectively. Incident cases were new recorded cases in a given calendar year with no relevant consultation in the previous 3 years (denominator = exact person-time in the same calendar year for the at-risk population). Prevalent cases were individuals with ≥ 1 consultation for the condition of interest recorded in a given calendar year, irrespective of prior consultations for the same condition (denominator = all patients with complete registration history in the previous 3 years). We estimated age-sex standardised incidence and annual (12-month period) prevalence for both conditions in 2000– 2019, overall, and by sex, age group, and region.Results: Standardised incidence and prevalence of LBP from Aurum were lower than those from GOLD until 2014, after which estimates were similar. Both databases showed recent declines in incidence and prevalence of LBP: declines began earlier in GOLD (after 2012– 2014) than Aurum (after 2014– 2015). Standardised incidence (after 2011) and prevalence of osteoarthritis (after 2003) were higher in Aurum than GOLD and showed different trends: incidence and prevalence were stable or increasing in Aurum, decreasing in GOLD. Stratified estimates in CPRD Aurum suggested consistently higher occurrence among women, older age groups, and those living in the north of England.Conclusion: Comparative analyses of two English databases produced conflicting estimates and trends for two common musculoskeletal conditions. Aurum estimates appeared more consistent with external sources and may be useful for monitoring population musculoskeletal health and healthcare demand, but they remain sensitive to analytic decisions and data quality.Keywords: musculoskeletal, electronic health records, epidemiologic methods, osteoarthritis, low back pain, primary care

This “Year in review” presents a selection of research themes and individual studies from the clinical osteoarthritis (OA) field (epidemiology and therapy) and includes noteworthy descriptive, analytical-observational, and intervention studies. The electronic database search for the review was conducted in Medline, Embase and medRxiv (15th April 2020 to 1st April 2021). Following study screening, the following OA-related themes emerged: COVID-19; disease burden; occupational risk; prediction models; cartilage loss and pain; stem cell treatments; novel pharmacotherapy trials; therapy for less well researched OA phenotypes; benefits and challenges of Individual Participant Data (IPD) meta-analyses; patient choice- balancing benefits and harms; OA and comorbidity; and inequalities in OA. Headline study findings included: a longitudinal cohort study demonstrating no evidence for a harmful effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in terms of COVID-19 related deaths; a Global Burden of Disease study reporting a 102% increase in crude incidence rate of OA in 2017 compared to 1990; a longitudinal study reporting cartilage thickness loss was associated with only a very small degree of worsening in pain over 2 years; an exploratory analysis of a non-OA randomised controlled trial (RCT) finding reduced risk of total joint replacement with an Interleukin -1β inhibitor (canakinumab); a significant relationship between cumulative disadvantage and clinical outcomes of pain and depression mediated by perceived discrimination in a secondary analysis from a RCT; worsening socioeconomic circumstances were associated with future arthritis diagnosis in an innovative natural experiment (with implications for unique research possibilities arising from the COVID-19 pandemic context).

To evaluate the performance and applicability of multivariable prediction models for osteoarthritis (OA).Systematic review and narrative synthesis using three databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science; inception to December 2021). We included general population longitudinal studies reporting derivation, comparison, or validation of multivariable models to predict individual risk of OA incidence, defined by recognised clinical or imaging criteria. We excluded studies reporting prevalent OA and joint arthroplasty outcome. Paired reviewers independently performed article selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Model performance, calibration and retained predictors were summarised.26 studies were included reporting 31 final multivariable prediction models for incident knee (23), hip (4), hand (3) and any-site OA (1), with a median of outcome events of 121.5 (range: 27-12,803), median prediction horizon of 8 years (2-41), and a median of 6 predictors (3-24). Age, body mass index, previous injury, and occupational exposures were among the most commonly included predictors. Model discrimination after validation was generally acceptable to excellent (Area Under the Curve = 0.70 to 0.85). Either internal or external validation processes were used in most models although risk of bias was often judged to be high with limited applicability to mass application in diverse populations.Despite growing interest in multivariable prediction models for incident OA, there remains a predominant focus on the knee, reliance on data from a small pool of appropriate cohort datasets, and concerns over general population applicability.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) suggest there is no role for routine radiography in the diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA). It is not known how consistent this recommendation is across international guidelines, or the impact of UK guidance on domestic OA X-ray request rates.A systematic search identified guideline recommendations on the role of radiography in OA diagnosis. Full texts underwent dual screening and appraisal using the AGREE II tool. A narrative synthesis was performed. Consultation data were extracted from a UK primary care database: the Consultations in Primary Care Archives (CiPCA). The annual proportion of X-ray requests per 100 OA consulters from 2000 to 2012 were calculated. Joinpoint regression analysis examined if there were changes in the trend of X-ray request rates and compared these with the publication dates of UK guidelines.Eighteen evidence-based OA guidelines were included in the review. Eleven recommended a clinical diagnosis of OA without radiographic confirmation. Seven recommended routine radiography; these guidelines were predominantly for radiologists. A mean of 17.3 X-rays per 100 patients were requested in patients consulting for OA per year between 2000 and 2012. A statistically significant reduction in X-ray request rates was seen in 2003.Recommendations on the role of radiography in OA vary between medical specialty and countries. UK guidelines appear to have had a limited impact on X-ray request rates in OA.

To compare the prevalence and timing of knee surgery (including meniscal, ligamentous, synovial, and osteotomy) in the 10 years prior to primary total knee replacement (TKR) between England and Sweden.This was a population-based, case-control study within England and southern Sweden using electronic health care databases. Patients underwent primary TKR between 2015 and 2019. Risk-set sampling showed that general population controls matched 1:1 by age, sex, and practice/municipality. The annual prevalence and prevalence ratio of having at least 1 recorded surgery in each of the 10 years preceding TKR was estimated using Poisson regressions.We included 6,308 and 47,010 TKR cases in Sweden and England, respectively. Meniscal surgeries were the most frequent procedure prior to TKR in both countries; prevalence was higher in England across all time points. The prevalence of meniscal surgery increased in both countries in the years approaching TKR, reaching 33.2 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 31.6-34.9) per 1,000 persons in England, and 9.83 (95% CI 7.66-12.61) in Sweden. In England, we observed a decrease from 2014 to 2018 in the utilization of this procedure in the 4 years preceding a TKR. The prevalence of all analyzed surgeries was consistently lower in controls.There are comparable trends in the use of knee surgery in the years preceding TKR across England and Sweden. Of note, meniscal surgeries remain common, even within the year prior to TKR, highlighting that these patients may experience low-value care. Careful consideration of knee surgery in those with late-stage disease is required.

Objective: To investigate whether adults with potential multiple social disadvantage have poorer outcomes following attendance in an osteoarthritis (OA) management program (OAMP), and if so, what might determine this result. Methods: Among consecutive knee OA attendees of the Good Life With Osteoarthritis in Denmark (GLA:D) OAMP in Denmark we defined a group with potential “intersectional disadvantage” based on self‐reported educational attainment, country of birth, and citizenship. Outcomes of this group were compared with GLA:D participants who were native Danish citizens with higher educational attainment. Outcomes were pain intensity, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) quality of life subscale score, and the EuroQol 5‐domain instrument in 5 levels (EQ‐5D‐5L) score at 3 and 12 months. After data preprocessing, we used entropy balancing to sequentially control for differences between the groups in baseline covariates. Mean between‐group differences in outcomes were estimated by weighted linear regression. Results: Of 18,448 eligible participants, 250 (1.4%) were nonnative/foreign citizens with lower education. After balancing for differences in baseline score and in administrative and demographic characteristics, they had poorer outcomes than higher‐educated native Danish citizens on pain intensity and EQ‐5D‐5L score at both follow‐up points (e.g., between‐group mean differences in pain visual analog scale [0–100] at 3 and 12 months: 3.4 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) –0.5, 7.3] and 6.2 [95% CI 1.7, 10.7], respectively). Differences in KOOS quality of life subscale score, were smaller or absent. Balancing for differences on baseline score, comorbidity, self‐efficacy, and depression had the greatest effect on reducing observed outcome inequalities. Conclusion: Outcome inequalities widened following OAMP attendance, particularly at longer‐term follow‐up, but the magnitude of differences was generally modest and inconsistent across outcome measures. Tailoring content to reduce outcome inequalities may be indicated, but improving access appears the greater priority.

Objective We wanted to determine whether socioeconomic inequalities in primary care consultation rates for two major, disabling musculoskeletal conditions in England narrowed or widened between 2004 and 2019. Methods We analysed data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, a national general practice electronic health records database, linked to national deprivation ranking of each patient’s registered residential postcode. For each year, we estimated the age- and sex-standardized consultation incidence and prevalence for low back pain and OA for the most deprived 10% of neighbourhoods through to the least deprived 10%. We then calculated the slope index of inequality and relative index of inequality overall and by sex, age group and geographical region. Results Inequalities in low back pain incidence and prevalence over socioeconomic status widened between 2004 and 2013 and stabilized between 2014 and 2019. Inequalities in OA incidence remained stable over socioeconomic status within the study period, whereas inequalities in OA prevalence widened markedly over socioeconomic status between 2004 and 2019. The widest gap in low back pain incidence and prevalence over socioeconomic status was observed in populations resident in northern English regions and London and in those of working age, peaking at 45–54 years. Conclusion We found persistent, and generally increasing, socioeconomic inequalities in the rate of adults presenting to primary care in England with low back pain and OA between 2004 and 2019.

Background: Young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy benefit from palliative care that supports their psychosocial needs. Acknowledging the sub-cultures they engage with can support their wellbeing. Anecdotal reports suggest video gaming is a sub-culture engaged with by young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Aim: To explore the lived experience of video gaming from the perspective of young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Design: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis approach involving in-depth interviews using a topic guide that focused on social media broadly, with reference to video gaming. Sequential interviewing was undertaken to support participation regarding fatigue and tiredness, symptoms of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Setting/participants: Participants were purposefully recruited from a hospice in the North of England. Twitter was used to support recruitment. Eight young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy were recruited to the study. Results: Five themes were developed; ‘gamer as a shared and accepted identity’, ‘an existential and bodily escapism’, ‘introspection through video gaming’, ‘video gaming as a release’ and ‘when life gives you few choices-video game’. Motivations for engagement with video gaming are diverse and reflective of the situated perspectives of young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Conclusions: An awareness of the popular sub-cultures that young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy engage with is key to building a therapeutic alliance, establishing rapport and recognising personhood in interactions between professionals and persons in palliative care settings. This study highlights the value of video gaming, offering professionals valuable insight into its placement in the daily lives of young men with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

Summary Objective To identify proximate causes (‘triggers’) of flares in adults with, or at risk of, knee osteoarthritis (OA), estimate their course and consequences, and determine higher risk individuals. Methods In this 13-week web-based case-crossover study adults aged ≥40 years, with or without a recorded diagnosis of knee OA, and no inflammatory arthropathy who self-reported a knee flare completed a questionnaire capturing information on exposure to 21 putative activity-related, psychosocial and environmental triggers (hazard period, ≤72 hours prior). Comparisons were made with identical exposure measurements at four 4-weekly scheduled time points (non-flare control period) using conditional logistic regression. Flare was defined as a sudden onset of worsening signs and symptoms, sustained for ≥24 hours. Flare characteristics, course and consequence were analysed descriptively. Associations between flare frequency and baseline characteristics were estimated using Poisson regression. Results Of 744 recruited participants (mean age (SD) 62.1 (10.2) years; 61% female), 376 reported 568 flares (hazards) and provided 867 valid control period measurements. Thirteen exposures (8 activity-related, 5 psychosocial/environmental) were positively associated with flare onset within 24 hours (strongest odds ratio estimate, knee buckling: 9.06: 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.86, 13.99; weakest, cold/damp weather: 1.45: 95%CI 1.12, 1.87). Median flare duration was 5 days (IQR 3, 8), less common if older (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.98: 95%CI 0.97, 0.99), more common if female (IRR 1.85: 95%CI 1.43, 2.39). Conclusions Multiple activity-related, psychosocial and environmental exposures are implicated in triggering flares. This evidence can help inform prevention and acute symptom management for patients and clinicians.

ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effectiveness of adding a single ultrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of corticosteroid and local anaesthetic to advice and education in adults with hip osteoarthritis.DesignPragmatic, three arm, parallel group, single blind, randomised controlled trial.SettingTwo community musculoskeletal services in England.Participants199 adults aged ≥40 years with hip osteoarthritis and at least moderate pain: 67 were randomly assigned to receive advice and education (best current treatment (BCT)), 66 to BCT plus ultrasound guided injection of triamcinolone and lidocaine, and 66 to BCT plus ultrasound guided injection of lidocaine.InterventionsBCT alone, BCT plus ultrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of 40 mg triamcinolone acetonide and 4 mL 1% lidocaine hydrochloride, or BCT plus ultrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of 5 mL 1% lidocaine. Participants in the ultrasound guided arms were masked to the injection they received.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was self-reported current intensity of hip pain (0-10 Numerical Rating Scale) over six months. Outcomes were self-reported at two weeks and at two, four, and six months.ResultsMean age of the study sample was 62.8 years (standard deviation 10.0) and 113 (57%) were women. Average weighted follow-up rate across time points was 93%. Greater mean improvement in hip pain intensity over six months was reported with BCT plus ultrasound-triamcinolone-lidocaine compared with BCT: mean difference −1.43 (95% confidence interval −2.15 to −0.72), PConclusionsUltrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of triamcinolone is a treatment option to add to BCT for people with hip osteoarthritis.Trial registrationEudraCT 2014-003412-37; ISRCTN50550256.

We present a signal enhancement strategy for benchtop NMR that produces SNR increases on the order of 10 to 30 fold by collapsing the target resonance into an extremely narrow singlet. Importantly, the resultant signal is amenable to quantitative interpretation and therefore can be applied to analytical applications such as reaction monitoring.

Despite current evidence, little is known about the impact of comorbidity burden on invasive management strategies and clinical outcomes in the context of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). All ACS hospitalizations between 2004 and 2014 from the National Inpatient Sample were included, stratified by Elixhauser Comorbidity Score (ECS) and number of Elixhauser Comorbidities (NEC) to compare the receipt of invasive management and clinical outcomes between different ECS and NEC classes to the lowest class of either measure. A total of 6,613,623 records with ACS were included in the analysis. Overall comorbidity burden increased over the 11-year period, with higher comorbidity classes (ECS ≥ 14 and NEC ≥ 5) increasing from 2.1% to 4.6% and 4% to 16%, respectively. Higher ECS and NEC classes negatively correlated with the rates of utilization of coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (ECS ≥14 vs

Objective: To identify distinct recovery trajectories of acute flares of knee pain and associated participant characteristics. Methods: Data were from the FLARE randomized controlled trial, a multicenter trial in 27 primary care centers in the UK and Netherlands of 3 regimes of oral nonsteroidal antiinflammatory therapy for acute flares of knee pain. Individuals with a history of inflammatory/crystal arthritis, fibromyalgia, and chronic pain syndrome were excluded. Latent class growth analysis was applied to measures of pain intensity repeated over 5 days to identify distinct recovery trajectories. The concurrent courses of interference with activity, stiffness, and swelling for each trajectory group were modelled using generalized estimating equations. Participant age, sex, obesity, and osteoarthritis diagnosis were described for each trajectory group. Results: A total of 449 participants were included (median age 55 years, 41% female, 35% obese, and 42% diagnosed with osteoarthritis). A 6-group cubic model was deemed optimal, with trajectories distinguished by rate of pain reduction and absolute level at final measurement. At the extremes were rapid and near-complete resolution (n = 41, 9%) and persistent, high pain (n = 25, 6%), but most participants showed a reduction and plateau in pain severity within 3–5 days. Within each pain trajectory group, interference with activity, stiffness, and swelling followed the same course as pain. Baseline characteristics did not differ substantially between trajectory groups. Conclusion: Even under a well-adhered to regime of oral nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medication, recovery following acute flares of knee pain is heterogeneous. Our observations that favorable trajectories are apparent within 3–5 days can help to inform treatment decision-making in the patient–health care professional consultation.

BACKGROUND: The first UK wave of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 placed unprecedented stress on community pharmacy. Various policies and initiatives were announced during this period to support community pharmacy to continue to perform in a manner that prioritised patient safety. However, little is understood about how these policies and initiatives were implemented by staff working in community pharmacy, and the system adaptions and responses that were initiated to maintain patient safety. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to investigate how staff working in UK community pharmacy during the first waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 responded and adapted to system stressors to maintain patient safety. METHODS: We adopted a qualitative interview approach, underpinned by Resilient Healthcare theory, with interview data collected between July 2020 and January 2021. Data were synthesised and analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: 23 community pharmacy staff from England and Scotland were interviewed. We identified five themes supported by between two and six sub-themes: 1. Covid-19, an impending threat to system; 2. Patient safety stressors during the first waves of Covid-19; 3. Altering the system, responding to system stressors; 4. Monitoring and adjusting and 5. Learning for the future. CONCLUSION: Privileging the accounts of community pharmacy staff working on the frontline during the pandemic illuminated how responses and adaptions were developed and deployed, how continual monitoring occurred, and the factors that supported or hindered system resilience. The key learning derived from this study can serve to shorten the gap between 'work as imagined' and 'work as done', and in doing so, support the future resilience performance of community pharmacy during future outbreaks of Covid-19 or similar events.

Hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) are leading causes of global disability. Most research to date has focused on the knee, with results often extrapolated to the hip, and this extends to treatment recommendations in clinical guidelines. Extrapolating results from research on knee OA may limit our understanding of disease characteristics specific to hip OA, thereby constraining development and implementation of effective treatments. This review highlights differences between hip and knee OA with respect to prevalence, prognosis, epigenetics, pathophysiology, anatomical and biomechanical factors, clinical presentation, pain and non-surgical treatment recommendations and management. (c) 2021 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Objectives To identify distinct foot pain trajectories over seven years and examine their associations with potential prognostic factors. Methods Adults aged ≥50 years registered with four general practices in North Staffordshire, UK were mailed a baseline health survey. Those reporting current or recent foot pain were invited to attend a research assessment clinic. Follow-up was by repeated postal surveys at 18, 36, 54, and 84 months. Distinct trajectories of foot pain were explored using Latent Class Growth Analysis (LCGA). Subsequently, identified trajectories were combined into most and least progressive groups and covariate-adjusted associations with a range of prognostic factors examined. Results Of 560 adults with foot pain attending baseline research clinics, 425 (76%) provided data at baseline and ≥2 follow-up time-points. LCGA for foot pain severity (0-10 Numerical Rating Scale) identified a four-trajectory model: 'mild, improving' (37%); 'moderate, improving' (33%); 'moderate-severe, persistent; (24%); 'severe, persistent' (6%). Compared with individuals in more favourable ('improving') pain trajectories, those in less favourable ('persistent') pain trajectories were more likely to be obese, have routine/manual and intermediate occupations, poorer physical and mental health, catastrophising beliefs, greater foot-specific functional limitation, and self-assessed hallux valgus at baseline. Conclusions Four distinct trajectories of foot pain were identified over a seven-year period, with one-third of individuals classified as having pain that is persistently moderate-severe and severe in intensity. The effect of intervening to target modifiable prognostic factors such as obesity and hallux valgus on long-term outcomes in people with foot pain requires investigation.

The median age for total hip arthroplasty (THA) is over 70 years with the corollary that many individuals have multiple multimorbidities. Despite the predicted improvement in quality of life, THA might be denied even to those with low levels of multimorbidity.ObjectiveTo evaluate how pre-existing levels of multimorbidity influence the likelihood and timing of THA.SettingLongitudinal record linkage study of a UK sample linking their primary care to their secondary care records.ParticipantsA total of 28 025 patients were included, based on the recording of the diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis in a national primary care register, Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Data were extracted from the database on background health and morbidity status using five different constructs: Charlson Comorbidity Index, Electronic Frailty Index and counts of chronic diseases (from list of 17), prescribed medications and number of primary care visits prior to recording of osteoarthritis.Outcome measuresThe record of having received a THA as recorded in the primary care record and the linked secondary care database: Hospital Episode Statistics.Results40% had THA: median follow 10 months (range 1–17 years). Increased multimorbidity was associated with a decreased likelihood of undergoing THA, irrespective of the method of assessing multimorbidity although the impact varied by approach.ConclusionMarkers of pre-existing ill health influence the decision for THA in the elderly with end-stage hip osteoarthritis, although these effects are modest for indices of multimorbidity other than eFI. There is evidence of this influence being present even in people with moderate decrements in their health, despite the balance of benefits to risk in these individuals being positive.

Involving research users in setting priorities for musculoskeletal research is essential to raise awareness of the unmet needs for MSK research, to ensure research outcomes are patient-centred and relevant, have a high likelihood of resulting in patient benefit, reduce research waste and increase research value and impact. In 2018, Versus Arthritis convened an MSK Disorders Research Advisory Group (RAG) which included people with arthritis, health care professionals and researchers in MSK, in order to identify and prioritise research areas with a long-term aim of improving quality and impact of MSK research. On further review, there were few previous prioritisation approaches in this area looking across discovery science to more clinical research, at important research questions which might be common to a range of disorders or approaches incorporating input at all stages of the process by a range of stakeholders including people with arthritis. The group identified that more work to define research priorities in these areas was justified and designed a research priority setting process for MSK disorders. This manuscript documents the methodology that was developed by the group for this process.MethodsFollowing a review, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method for research prioritisation was selected as best aligning with the needs of this process. The group agreed on adaptations to the CHNRI approach, context, purpose and remit of the exercise and identified through consensus four priority research Domains: Mechanisms of disease; Diagnosis (including early diagnosis) and measuring the impact of these disorders; Living well with MSK disorders and Successful Translation. From all published CHNRI scoring criteria for generated research avenues or themes of research, the group identified six which were most relevant to this process. To ensure accessibility of the survey and scoring, these were refined to three: Equity (considered cross cutting, not scored but considered throughout the process), Importance (Will research in this area have potential to lead to important new knowledge) and Impact (Might research in this area make a difference). Importance and Impact were to be scored on a scale of 1-10 for each research avenue with equal weighting of these two criteria in the subsequent generation of a total score.Data collectionFollowing ethical approval, an electronic first survey asking for important research uncertainties in the four research domains and any other areas will be distributed to all stakeholders (people with arthritis, researchers in all stages of MSK disorders research, healthcare professionals, industry e.g. pharmaceutical and medical technology companies, research funders, healthcare providers, government policy makers and charities). The next step is to consolidate all the gathered research uncertainties from the first survey into finalised research domains and avenues. Uncertainties will be summarised using deductive thematic analysis and organised into possible themes which will then be considered and refined by each of four appointed subgroups within the RAG. Following group and lay review and refinement of the wording including tests of readability, the second survey including this full list of research avenues will be submitted for ethical approval. The second survey will be completed by the same range of stakeholders as the first survey, both those who previously completed and new respondents. Respondents will be invited to rate each research avenue using the two scoring criteria, with the avenues presented in a random sequence to avoid bias.Analysis PlanAll available data will be analysed, from all respondents completing the survey in full and all partial respondents. For each research avenue, a mean criterion score will be calculated for each of the two criteria from all available survey responses (considering the number of respondents in each case), and then the two mean criterion scores will be summed to create a total score. Response rates and missing data for scoring of avenues will be reported. The primary prioritisation output of this exercise will be to produce a single ranked list of these total scores of research avenues, from highest to lowest. The most highly ranked avenues will be highlighted, for example the top five to top ten overall and from each research domain, with the exact number and nature of this depending on the distribution of the data. Respondent characteristics will be summarised including self-identified stakeholder group, age group, gender and ethnic background, to describe the diversity and representation within the survey respondents as far as possible.Dissemination planFindings will be communicated in a number of formats, both written and spoken, to ensure accessibility to all stakeholders, and will also be used by the charity in internal strategy development. Dissemination will include the submission of a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal.

Objectives Better indicators from affordable, sustainable data sources are needed to monitor population burden of musculoskeletal conditions. We propose five indicators of musculoskeletal health and assessed if routinely available primary care electronic health records (EHR) can estimate population levels in musculoskeletal consulters. Methods We collected validated patient-reported measures of pain experience, function and health status through a local survey of adults (≥35 years) presenting to English general practices over 12 months for low back pain, shoulder pain, osteoarthritis and other regional musculoskeletal disorders. Using EHR data we derived and validated models for estimating population levels of five self-reported indicators: prevalence of high impact chronic pain, overall musculoskeletal health (based on Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire), quality of life (based on EuroQoL health utility measure), and prevalence of moderate-to-severe low back pain and moderate-to-severe shoulder pain. We applied models to a national EHR database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) to obtain national estimates of each indicator for three successive years. Results The optimal models included recorded demographics, deprivation, consultation frequency, analgesic and antidepressant prescriptions, and multimorbidity. Applying models to national EHR, we estimated that 31.9% of adults (≥35 years) presenting with non-inflammatory musculoskeletal disorders in England in 2016/17 experienced high impact chronic pain. Estimated population health levels were worse in women, older aged and those in the most deprived neighbourhoods, and changed little over 3 years. Conclusion National and subnational estimates for a range of subjective indicators of non-inflammatory musculoskeletal health conditions can be obtained using information from routine electronic health records.

Background Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) collected in surveys allow understanding of the health at the population-level. We aimed to test the feasibility of estimating health status as measured by PROMs through ecological prediction models which use local linked survey and primary care electronic health records (EHR) and applying the models to national EHR. Methods 3,710 musculoskeletal consulters registered in 11 general practiced in North Staffordshire, UK and consented the linkage of their survey PROM (high impact pain, (HICP)) with EHR were included in this study. HICP was modelled by EHR predictors covering demographic, lifestyle risk factors, musculoskeletal diagnostic/problems, analgesic prescriptions, comorbidities, and deprivation. Final set of predictors were selected through backward elimination (p > 0.1). Individual-level prediction models (binary logistic regression) were fitted and evaluated in terms of model fit statistics (AIC, BIC, R-square), discrimination (C-statistics) and calibration-slope with internal validation. The final model was cross-mapped to a national UK primary EHR database (Clinical Practice Research Database) to obtain national population estimates of high impact pain. Results The C-statistics and calibration-slope of the final model was 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.70-0.79) and 1.00 (0.92-1.08), respectively. The estimated HICP was 51.2% overall among 49,788 UK musculoskeletal consulters and matched hypothesised variation by gender, age, deprivation and geographical regions. Conclusions Estimation of population-level health status as measured by PROM using EHR appears feasible and has potential application in assessing health inequalities. Further independent external validation studies are warranted. Key messages Primary care EHR data could be modelled to predict population-level PROMs.

Introduction Limited data are available on the influence of multimorbidity on the outcomes of total hip replacement for patients with hip osteoarthritis, including the rate of complications and degree of functional benefit. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of multimorbidity on the outcomes of total hip replacement in the UK. Method A cohort study was performed, with cohort comprised of all patients over 65 years with a diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis recorded in Clinical Practice Research Datalink and receipt of primary total hip replacement recorded in Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care. Severity of multimorbidity burden was measured using four different scores (Charlson Comorbidity Index, Electronic Frailty Index, count of drugs prescribed, count of primary care interactions). The outcomes were (i) the risks of total hip replacement, assessed by serious post-operative complications within 90 days (analysed with logistic regression), and (ii) the benefits of surgery, assessed by post-operative Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and EQ-5D quality of life score (analysed with linear regression). Results 6,682 patients were included. The rate of complications was 3.2%. Patients with severe multimorbidity burden were at 1.5 to 2.5 times increased risk of complications than patients without multimorbidity. There was no clinically meaningful difference in the benefits of surgery between patients with and without multimorbidity, irrespective of the method of scoring multimorbidity. Conclusions Even for patients with severe multimorbidity burden, the potential benefits of total hip replacement for osteoarthritis remain substantial, while the increase in risk is relatively small.

Introduction Limited data are available on the influence of multimorbidity on the outcomes of total hip replacement for patients with hip osteoarthritis. Thus, patients with multimorbidity and their clinicians across the UK are making decisions on whether or not to proceed with total hip replacement without clear information available on the potential risks and benefits. It is not known how such patients are currently managed. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of multimorbidity on the likelihood of receiving total hip replacement in patients with hip osteoarthritis in the UK. Method A cohort study was performed, with cohort comprised of all patients over 65 years with a diagnosis of hip osteoarthritis recorded in Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Severity of multimorbidity burden was measured using four different scores (Charlson Comorbidity Index, Electronic Frailty Index, count of drugs prescribed, count of primary care interactions). The outcome was total hip replacement, evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival and competing-risk analyses. Results 28,025 patients were included. 10,948 patients underwent total hip replacement. Increased multimorbidity burden was associated with decreased likelihood of undergoing surgery, irrespective of the method of scoring multimorbidity. Electronic Frailty Index had the largest difference between categories. Adjusted hazard ratio (‘severe multimorbidity versus ‘fit’) was 0.34 (95% CI 0.22, 0.51). Conclusions Patients with hip osteoarthritis and concurrent multimorbidity were up to two thirds less likely to undergo total hip replacement. Whether this difference in healthcare management is appropriate depends on to what extent multimorbidity influences the outcomes of total hip replacement.

ObjectivesTo estimate the risk of clinically diagnosed knee osteoarthritis (OA) after different types of knee injuries in young adults.MethodsIn a longitudinal cohort study based on population-based healthcare data from Skåne, Sweden, we included all persons aged 25–34 years in 1998–2007 (n=149 288) with and without diagnoses of knee injuries according to International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10. We estimated the HR of future diagnosed knee OA in injured and uninjured persons using Cox regression, adjusted for potential confounders. We also explored the impact of type of injury (contusion, fracture, dislocation, meniscal tear, cartilage tear/other injury, collateral ligament tear, cruciate ligament tear and injury to multiple structures) on diagnosed knee OA risk.ResultsWe identified 5247 persons (mean (SD) age 29.4 (2.9) years, 67% men) with a knee injury and 142 825 persons (mean (SD) age 30.2 (3.0) years, 45% men) without. We found an adjusted HR of 5.7 (95% CI 5.0 to 6.6) for diagnosed knee OA in injured compared with uninjured persons during the first 11 years of follow-up and 3.4 (95% CI 2.9 to 4.0) during the following 8 years. The corresponding risk difference (RD) after 19 years of follow-up was 8.1% (95% CI 6.7% to 9.4%). Cruciate ligament injury, meniscal tear and fracture of the tibia plateau/patella were associated with greatest increase in risk (RD of 19.6% (95% CI 13.2% to 25.9%), 10.5% (95% CI 6.4% to 14.7%) and 6.6% (95% CI 1.1% to 12.2%), respectively).ConclusionIn young adults, knee injury increases the risk of future diagnosed knee OA about sixfold with highest risks found after cruciate ligament injury, meniscal tear and intra-articular fracture.

BackgroundDespite absence of evidence of a clinical benefit of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM), many surgeons claim that subgroups of patients benefit from APM.ObjectiveWe developed a prognostic model predicting change in patient-reported outcome 1 year following arthroscopic meniscal surgery to identify such subgroups.MethodsWe included 641 patients (age 48.7 years (SD 13), 56% men) undergoing arthroscopic meniscal surgery from the Knee Arthroscopy Cohort Southern Denmark. 18 preoperative factors identified from literature and/or orthopaedic surgeons (patient demographics, medical history, symptom onset and duration, knee-related symptoms, etc) were combined in a multivariable linear regression model. The outcome was change in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4) (average score of 4 of 5 KOOS subscales excluding the activities of daily living subscale) from presurgery to 52 weeks after surgery. A positive KOOS4change score constitutes improvement. Prognostic performance was assessed using R2statistics and calibration plots and was internally validated by adjusting for optimism using 1000 bootstrap samples.ResultsPatients improved on average 18.6 (SD 19.7, range −38.0 to 87.8) in KOOS4. The strongest prognostic factors for improvement were (1) no previous meniscal surgery on index knee and (2) more severe preoperative knee-related symptoms. The model’s overall predictive performance was low (apparent R2=0.162, optimism adjusted R2=0.080) and it showed poor calibration (calibration-in-the-large=0.205, calibration slope=0.772).ConclusionDespite combining a large number of preoperative factors presumed clinically relevant, change in patient-reported outcome 1 year following meniscal surgery was not predictable. This essentially quashes the existence of ‘subgroups’ with certain characteristics having a particularly favourable outcome after meniscal surgery.Trial registration numberNCT01871272.