Elizabeth Houlding-Braunberger1,2,3, Jennifer Petkovic4,5, Nicholas Lebel2,6, Peter Tugwell7,8,9. 1. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. 2. Faculty of Science, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 4. Bruyère Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 5. WHO Collaborating Centre for knowledge Translation and Health Technology Assessment in Health Equity, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. 6. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 7. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. ptugwell@uottawa.ca. 8. WHO Collaborating Centre for knowledge Translation and Health Technology Assessment in Health Equity, Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada. ptugwell@uottawa.ca. 9. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. ptugwell@uottawa.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis generates substantial health and socioeconomic burden, which is particularly marked in marginalized groups. It is imperative that practitioners have ready access to summaries of evidence-based interventions for osteoarthritis that incorporate equity considerations. Summaries of systematic reviews can provide this. The present study surveyed experts to prioritize a selection ofinterventions, from which equity focused summaries will be generated. Specifically, the prioritized interventions will be developed into Cochrane Evidence4Equity (E4E) summaries. METHODS: Twenty-seven systematic reviews of OA interventions were found. From these, twenty-nine non-surgical treatments for osteoarthritis were identified, based on statistically significant findings for desired outcome variables or adverse events. Key findings from these studies were summarised and provided to 9 experts in the field of osteoarthritis.. Expert participants were asked to rate interventions based on feasibility, health system effects, universality, impact on inequities, and priority for translation into equity based E4E summaries. Expert participants were also encouraged to make comments to provide context for each rating. Free text responses were coded inductively and grouped into subthemes and themes. RESULTS: Expert participants rated the intervention home land-based exercise for knee OA highest for priority for translation into an E4E summaries, followed by the interventions individual land-based exercise for knee OA, class land-based exercise for knee OA, exercise for hand OA and land-based exercise for hip OA. Upon qualitative analysis of the expert participants' comments, fifteen subthemes were identified and grouped into three overall themes: (1) this intervention or an aspect of this intervention is unnecessary or unsafe; (2) this intervention or an aspect of this intervention may increase health inequities; and (3) experts noted difficulties completing rating exercise. CONCLUSION: The list of priority interventions and corresponding expert commentary generated information that will be used to direct and support knowledge translation efforts.
OBJECTIVE:Osteoarthritis generates substantial health and socioeconomic burden, which is particularly marked in marginalized groups. It is imperative that practitioners have ready access to summaries of evidence-based interventions for osteoarthritis that incorporate equity considerations. Summaries of systematic reviews can provide this. The present study surveyed experts to prioritize a selection ofinterventions, from which equity focused summaries will be generated. Specifically, the prioritized interventions will be developed into Cochrane Evidence4Equity (E4E) summaries. METHODS: Twenty-seven systematic reviews of OA interventions were found. From these, twenty-nine non-surgical treatments for osteoarthritis were identified, based on statistically significant findings for desired outcome variables or adverse events. Key findings from these studies were summarised and provided to 9 experts in the field of osteoarthritis.. Expert participants were asked to rate interventions based on feasibility, health system effects, universality, impact on inequities, and priority for translation into equity based E4E summaries. Expert participants were also encouraged to make comments to provide context for each rating. Free text responses were coded inductively and grouped into subthemes and themes. RESULTS: Expert participants rated the intervention home land-based exercise for knee OA highest for priority for translation into an E4E summaries, followed by the interventions individual land-based exercise for knee OA, class land-based exercise for knee OA, exercise for hand OA and land-based exercise for hip OA. Upon qualitative analysis of the expert participants' comments, fifteen subthemes were identified and grouped into three overall themes: (1) this intervention or an aspect of this intervention is unnecessary or unsafe; (2) this intervention or an aspect of this intervention may increase health inequities; and (3) experts noted difficulties completing rating exercise. CONCLUSION: The list of priority interventions and corresponding expert commentary generated information that will be used to direct and support knowledge translation efforts.
Authors: Cheryl Barnabe; Brenda Hemmelgarn; C Allyson Jones; Christine A Peschken; Don Voaklander; Lawrence Joseph; Sasha Bernatsky; John M Esdaile; Deborah A Marshall Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2014-11-29 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: N Steel; A C Hardcastle; M O Bachmann; S H Richards; L T A Mounce; A Clark; I Lang; D Melzer; J Campbell Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Taruja D Karmarkar; Anne Maurer; Michael L Parks; Thomas Mason; Ana Bejinez-Eastman; Melvyn Harrington; Randall Morgan; Mary I O'Connor; James E Wood; Darrell J Gaskin Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.983