A clinical guideline is a document with the aim of guiding decisions based on evidence regarding diagnosis, management and treatment in specific areas of healthcare. Specific to rheumatic and... Show moreA clinical guideline is a document with the aim of guiding decisions based on evidence regarding diagnosis, management and treatment in specific areas of healthcare. Specific to rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), adherence to clinical guidelines recommendations impacts the outcomes of people with these diseases. However, currently, the implementation of recommendations is less than optimal in rheumatology.The WHO has described the implementation of evidence-based recommendations as one of the greatest challenges facing the global health community and has identified the importance of scaling up these recommendations. But closing the evidence-to-practice gap is often complex, time-consuming and difficult. In this context, the implementation science offers a framework to overcome this scenario. This article describes the principles of implementation science to facilitate and optimise the implementation of clinical recommendations in RMDs. Embedding implementation science methods and techniques into recommendation development and daily practice can help maximise the likelihood that implementation is successful in improving the quality of healthcare and healthcare services. Show less
Kroon, F.P.B.; Heijde, D. van der; Maxwell, L.J.; Beaton, D.E.; Abishek, A.; Berenbaum, F.; ... ; Kloppenburg, M. 2021
Objective: Physical function is one of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core outcome domains for hand osteoarthritis studies. Our aim was to select appropriate instrument(s) to... Show moreObjective: Physical function is one of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core outcome domains for hand osteoarthritis studies. Our aim was to select appropriate instrument(s) to measure this domain, as part of the development of a core outcome measurement set.Methods: Following the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection process, the (function subscale of) the Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index (AUSCAN), Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) and Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) were assessed for domain match, feasibility, truth and discrimination. Data gathered from available literature, working group and patient surveys, and additional analyses in two hand osteoarthritis cohorts were used to inform a consensus process.Results were summarized in Summary of Measurements Properties tables and reviewed by the OMERACT technical advisory group. Results: MHQ passed the assessment of domain match and feasibility by the working group and patient research partners. For AUSCAN important limitations in feasibility were noted, but domain match was good. FIHOA did not pass the assessment and was not taken through the follow-up assessment. Based on published literature, reliability and construct/longitudinal validity of both MHQ and AUSCAN fulfilled OMERACT standards. While clinical trial discrimination and thresholds of meaning were good for AUSCAN, results for MHQ were ambiguous.Conclusion: MHQ was provisionally endorsed as OMERACT core outcome measure for the core domain physical function. While AUSCAN may have better metric properties than MHQ, it received provisional endorsement as a second measure of function due to important feasibility issues. A research agenda to merit full endorsement was set. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. Show less
Moseng, T.; Dagfinrud, H.; Bodegom-Vos, L. van; Dziedzic, K.; Hagen, K.B.; Natvig, B.; ... ; Osteras, N. 2020
BackgroundTo address the well-documented gap between hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment recommendations and current clinical practice, a structured model for integrated OA care was... Show moreBackgroundTo address the well-documented gap between hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment recommendations and current clinical practice, a structured model for integrated OA care was developed and evaluated in a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial. The current study used secondary outcomes to evaluate clinically important response to treatment through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials clinical responder criteria (OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria) after 3 and 6months between patients receiving the structured OA care model vs. usual care. Secondly, the study aimed to investigate if the proportion of responders in the intervention group was influenced by adherence to the exercise program inherent in the model.MethodsThe study was conducted in primary healthcare in six Norwegian municipalities. General practitioners and physiotherapists received training in OA treatment recommendations and use of the structured model. The intervention group attended a physiotherapist-led OA education program and performed individually tailored exercises for 8-12weeks. The control group received usual care. Patient-reported pain, function and global assessment of disease activity during the last week were evaluated using 11-point numeric rating scales (NRS 0-10). These scores were used to calculate the proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders. Two-level mixed logistic regression models were fitted to investigate differences in responders between the intervention and control group.ResultsTwo hundred eighty-four intervention and 109 control group participants with hip and knee OA recruited from primary care in six Norwegian municipalities. In total 47% of the intervention and 35% of the control group participants were responders at 3 or 6months combined; showing an uncertain between-group difference (ORadjusted 1.38 (95% CI 0.41, 4.67). In the intervention group, 184 participants completed the exercise programme (exercised >= 2 times/week for >= 8weeks) and 55% of these were classified as responders. In contrast, 28% of the 86 non-completers were classified as responders.ConclusionsThe difference in proportion of OMERACT-OARSI responders at 3 and 6months between the intervention and control group was uncertain. In the intervention group, a larger proportion of responders were seen among the exercise completers compared to the non-completers.Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02333656. Registered 7. January 2015. Show less
