Rikke Helene Moe1, Margreth Grotle2, Ingvild Kjeken2, Inge Christoffer Olsen2, Petter Mowinckel2, Espen A Haavardsholm2, Kåre Birger Hagen2, Tore K Kvien2, Till Uhlig2. 1. From the National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology; Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, the University of Oslo; Department of Physiotherapy, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences/Formi, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.R.H. Moe, PT, PhD, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; M. Grotle, PT, PhD, Professor, Department of Physiotherapy, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences/Formi, Oslo University Hospital; I. Kjeken, OT, PhD, Professor, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; I.C. Olsen, PhD, Statistician, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; P. Mowinckel, MSc, Statistician, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; E.A. Haavardsholm, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; K.B. Hagen, PT, PhD, Professor, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, and Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, the University of Oslo; T.K. Kvien, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; T. Uhlig, MD, PhD, Professor, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital. rikmoe@gmail.com. 2. From the National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology; Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, the University of Oslo; Department of Physiotherapy, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences/Formi, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.R.H. Moe, PT, PhD, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; M. Grotle, PT, PhD, Professor, Department of Physiotherapy, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences/Formi, Oslo University Hospital; I. Kjeken, OT, PhD, Professor, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; I.C. Olsen, PhD, Statistician, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; P. Mowinckel, MSc, Statistician, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; E.A. Haavardsholm, MD, PhD, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; K.B. Hagen, PT, PhD, Professor, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, and Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, the University of Oslo; T.K. Kvien, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital; T. Uhlig, MD, PhD, Professor, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the leading causes of pain and disability. Given the constraint in the provision of care, there is a need to develop and assess effectiveness of new treatment models. The objective was to compare satisfaction with and effectiveness of a new integrated multidisciplinary outpatient program with usual care in an outpatient clinic for patients with OA. METHODS:Patients with clinical OA referred to a rheumatology outpatient clinic were randomized to a 3.5-h multidisciplinary group-based educational program followed by individual consultations, or to usual care. The primary outcome was satisfaction with the health service evaluated on a numerical rating scale (0 = extremely unsatisfied, 10 = extremely satisfied) after 4 months. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life measures. RESULTS:Of 391 patients, 86.4% (n = 338) were women, and mean age was 61.2 (SD 8.0) years. At 4 months, patients who received integrated multidisciplinary care were significantly more satisfied with the health service compared with controls, with a mean difference of -1.05 (95% CI -1.68 to -0.43, p < 0.001). Among secondary outcomes, only self-efficacy with other symptoms scale (10-100) improved significantly in the multidisciplinary group compared with controls at 4 months (3.59, 95% CI 0.69-6.5, p = 0.02). At 12 months, the Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index pain (0-10) and fatigue scores (0-10) were slightly worse in the multidisciplinary group with differences of 0.38 (95% CI 0.06-0.71, p = 0.02) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.02-1.07, p = 0.04), respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving an integrated multidisciplinary care model were more satisfied with healthcare than those receiving usual care, whereas there were no clinically relevant improvements in health outcomes.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE:Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the leading causes of pain and disability. Given the constraint in the provision of care, there is a need to develop and assess effectiveness of new treatment models. The objective was to compare satisfaction with and effectiveness of a new integrated multidisciplinary outpatient program with usual care in an outpatient clinic for patients with OA. METHODS:Patients with clinical OA referred to a rheumatology outpatient clinic were randomized to a 3.5-h multidisciplinary group-based educational program followed by individual consultations, or to usual care. The primary outcome was satisfaction with the health service evaluated on a numerical rating scale (0 = extremely unsatisfied, 10 = extremely satisfied) after 4 months. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life measures. RESULTS: Of 391 patients, 86.4% (n = 338) were women, and mean age was 61.2 (SD 8.0) years. At 4 months, patients who received integrated multidisciplinary care were significantly more satisfied with the health service compared with controls, with a mean difference of -1.05 (95% CI -1.68 to -0.43, p < 0.001). Among secondary outcomes, only self-efficacy with other symptoms scale (10-100) improved significantly in the multidisciplinary group compared with controls at 4 months (3.59, 95% CI 0.69-6.5, p = 0.02). At 12 months, the Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index pain (0-10) and fatigue scores (0-10) were slightly worse in the multidisciplinary group with differences of 0.38 (95% CI 0.06-0.71, p = 0.02) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.02-1.07, p = 0.04), respectively. CONCLUSION:Patients receiving an integrated multidisciplinary care model were more satisfied with healthcare than those receiving usual care, whereas there were no clinically relevant improvements in health outcomes.
Authors: Hanbit Lee; Eun Kyoung Choi; Kyung A Min; Eunjeong Bae; Hooyun Lee; Jongsoo Lee Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-12 Impact factor: 3.390