J B Arnold1, C J Bowen2, L S Chapman3, L S Gates2, Y M Golightly4, J Halstead5, M T Hannan6, H B Menz7, S E Munteanu8, K L Paterson9, E Roddy10, H J Siddle3, M J Thomas10. 1. IIMPACT in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia. 2. School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Building 67, University Road, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK; Centre for Sport, Exercise and Osteoarthritis Research Versus Arthritis, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK. 3. Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Thurston Arthritis Research Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 3330 Thurston Building, CB 7280, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA. 5. Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK; Podiatry Services, Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust, Leeds, LS6 1PF, UK. 6. Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, And Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02108, USA. 7. School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3086, Australia; Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: h.menz@latrobe.edu.au. 8. School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3086, Australia. 9. Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, 3010, Australia. 10. Primary Care Centre Versus Arthritis, School of Medicine, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK; Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Haywood Hospital, Burslem, Staffordshire, ST6 7AG, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To summarise the available evidence relating to the diagnosis, epidemiology, burden, outcome assessment and treatment of foot and ankle osteoarthritis (OA) and to develop an agenda to guide future research. METHOD: Members of the International Foot and Ankle Osteoarthritis Consortium compiled a narrative summary of the literature which formed the basis of an interactive discussion at the Osteoarthritis Research Society International World Congress in 2021, during which a list of 24 research agenda items were generated. Following the meeting, delegates were asked to rank the research agenda items on a 0 to 100 visual analogue rating scale (0 = not at all important to 100 = extremely important). Items scoring a mean of 70 or above were selected for inclusion. RESULTS: Of the 45 delegates who attended the meeting, 31 contributed to the agenda item scoring. Nineteen research agenda items met the required threshold: three related to diagnosis, four to epidemiology, four to burden, three to outcome assessment and five to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Key knowledge gaps related to foot and ankle OA were identified, and a comprehensive agenda to guide future research planning was developed. Implementation of this agenda will assist in improving the understanding and clinical management of this common and disabling, yet relatively overlooked condition.
OBJECTIVE: To summarise the available evidence relating to the diagnosis, epidemiology, burden, outcome assessment and treatment of foot and ankle osteoarthritis (OA) and to develop an agenda to guide future research. METHOD: Members of the International Foot and Ankle Osteoarthritis Consortium compiled a narrative summary of the literature which formed the basis of an interactive discussion at the Osteoarthritis Research Society International World Congress in 2021, during which a list of 24 research agenda items were generated. Following the meeting, delegates were asked to rank the research agenda items on a 0 to 100 visual analogue rating scale (0 = not at all important to 100 = extremely important). Items scoring a mean of 70 or above were selected for inclusion. RESULTS: Of the 45 delegates who attended the meeting, 31 contributed to the agenda item scoring. Nineteen research agenda items met the required threshold: three related to diagnosis, four to epidemiology, four to burden, three to outcome assessment and five to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Key knowledge gaps related to foot and ankle OA were identified, and a comprehensive agenda to guide future research planning was developed. Implementation of this agenda will assist in improving the understanding and clinical management of this common and disabling, yet relatively overlooked condition.
Authors: Jason S Kim; Annunziato Amendola; Alexej Barg; Judith Baumhauer; James W Brodsky; Daniel M Cushman; Tyler A Gonzalez; Dennis Janisse; Michael J Jurynec; J Lawrence Marsh; Carolyn M Sofka; Thomas O Clanton; Donald D Anderson Journal: Foot Ankle Orthop Date: 2022-10-15