Ilana N. Ackerman

The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study

Objective To estimate the global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study and to explore how the burden of hip and knee OA compares with other conditions. Methods Systematic reviews were conducted to source age-specific and sex-specific epidemiological data for hip and knee OA prevalence, incidence and mortality risk. The prevalence and incidence of symptomatic, radiographic and self-reported hip or knee OA were included. Three levels of severity were defined to derive disability weights (DWs) and severity distribution (proportion with mild, moderate and severe OA). The prevalence by country and region was multiplied by the severity distribution and the appropriate disability weight to calculate years of life lived with disability (YLDs). As there are no deaths directly attributed to OA, YLDs equate disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Results Globally, of the 291 conditions, hip and knee OA was ranked as the 11th highest contributor to global disability and 38th highest in DALYs. The global age-standardised prevalence of knee OA was 3.8% (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 3.6% to 4.1%) and hip OA was 0.85% (95% UI 0.74% to 1.02%), with no discernible change from 1990 to 2010. Prevalence was higher in females than males. YLDs for hip and knee OA increased from 10.5 million in 1990 (0.42% of total DALYs) to 17.1 million in 2010 (0.69% of total DALYs). Conclusions Hip and knee OA is one of the leading causes of global disability. Methodological issues within this study make it highly likely that the real burden of OA has been underestimated. With the aging and increasing obesity of the worlds population, health professions need to prepare for a large increase in the demand for health services to treat hip and knee OA.

Does pre-operative physiotherapy improve outcomes from lower limb joint replacement surgery? A systematic review.

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of pre-operative physiotherapy programmes on outcome following lower limb joint replacement surgery. A search of relevant key terms was used to find suitable trials, with five papers meeting the inclusion criteria for the review. The methodological quality of the trials was rated using the PEDro scale. Estimates of the size of treatment effects were calculated for each outcome in each trial, with 95% confidence intervals calculated where sufficient data were provided. Of the three trials pertaining to total knee replacement, only very small mean differences were found between control and intervention groups for all of the outcome measures. Where confidence intervals could be calculated, these showed no clinically important differences between the groups. Two papers (one study) pertaining to total hip replacements found significant improvements in WOMAC scores, hip strength and range of movement, walking distance, cadence, and gait velocity for the intervention group, compared to a control group. Estimates of treatment effect sizes for these outcomes were larger than for the total knee replacement studies, with confidence intervals showing potentially clinically important differences between group means. However, as the intervention group also received an additional intensive post-operative physiotherapy program, these results cannot be attributed solely to the pre-operative program. This systematic review shows that pre-operative physiotherapy programmes are not effective in improving outcome after total knee replacement but their effect on outcome from total hip replacement cannot be adequately determined.

Health-Related Quality of Life After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction A Systematic Review

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (ACLRs) are frequently performed on young, active patients and can result in persistent knee symptoms and activity limitations that may affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL). To date, there has been no systematic review of HRQoL outcomes after ACLR. Purpose: The objectives of this study were to report HRQoL ≥5 years after ACLR, compare HRQoL outcomes with available population norms, and describe factors that may affect HRQoL in this population. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: All studies reporting HRQoL ≥5 years after ACLR with hamstring or patellar tendon autografts were eligible for review. Common HRQoL outcomes were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis and compared with published population norms. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient (ρ) was used to identify variables associated with HRQoL outcomes. Where insufficient data were available, outcomes were reported descriptively. Results: Fourteen studies were eligible for review, and HRQoL was reported for 2493 patients at a mean of 9 years (range, 5-16 years) after ACLR. Pooling of knee-related quality of life outcomes (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]–QOL) found impairments after ACLR when compared with population norms. In comparison, studies using the Short Form–36 (SF-36) reported similar or better HRQoL compared with normative data. The KOOS-QOL subscores correlated strongly with KOOS-sport/recreation (ρ = .70, P = .04) and KOOS-pain (ρ = .85, P = .003) subscores. Severe radiographic osteoarthritis, meniscal injuries sustained after surgery, and revision ACLR were associated with poorer HRQoL outcomes at a minimum 5-year follow-up. The negative influence of concomitant meniscal surgery on HRQoL became apparent more than 10 years after ACLR. Conclusion: This review found that patients assessed using a knee-specific measure (KOOS-QOL) were more likely to report poorer HRQoL values, compared with population norms, than those assessed using a generic HRQoL measure (SF-36). Revision surgeries, meniscal injuries, and severe radiographic osteoarthritis were associated with poorer HRQoL outcomes after ACLR. However, these relationships should be interpreted with caution, as they were only investigated in a small number of studies. Clinical Relevance: These results can be used by clinicians to educate patients about potential long-term outcomes after ACLR and to develop strategies for optimizing postoperative HRQoL.

Obesity and increased burden of hip and knee joint disease in Australia: Results from a national survey

BackgroundResearch involving more representative samples is needed to extend our understanding of the broader impact of obesity in hip or knee joint disease (arthritis and OA) beyond clinical settings. Although population-based research has been conducted in the United States, how these findings translate to other countries is unclear. Using a national approach, this study explored associations between obesity and the burden of hip and knee joint disease in Australia (in terms of prevalence, pain, stiffness, function, Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) and disease severity).MethodsA random sample of 5000 Australians (≥39 years) from the federal electoral roll was invited to complete a mailed questionnaire to identify doctor-diagnosed hip arthritis, hip OA, knee arthritis and knee OA and evaluate the burden of these conditions. Validated questionnaires included the WOMAC Index, Assessment of Quality of Life instrument and Multi-Attribute Prioritisation Tool. Body Mass Index (BMI) was classified into underweight/normal weight (≤24.99 kg/m2), overweight (25–29.99) or obese (≥30). Multiple logistic regression was used to estimate odds of arthritis and OA, with demographic and socioeconomic variables included in the models. Associations between BMI and other variables were investigated using analysis of covariance, with adjustment for age and sex.ResultsData were available from 1,157 participants (23%). Overweight participants had increased odds of knee arthritis (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.87, 95%CI 1.14-3.07) and knee OA (AOR 2.11, 95%CI 1.07-4.15). Obesity was associated with higher prevalence of hip arthritis (AOR 2.18, 95%CI 1.17-4.06), knee arthritis (AOR 5.47, 95%CI 3.35-8.95) and knee OA (AOR 7.35, 95%CI 3.85-14.02). Of those with arthritis or OA, obese individuals reported more pain (for hip arthritis, hip OA and knee OA), greater stiffness (for hip arthritis, knee arthritis and knee OA), worse function (all diagnoses), lower HRQoL (for hip arthritis and hip OA) and greater disease severity (all diagnoses).ConclusionsThis national study has demonstrated that the odds of arthritis and OA was up to 7 times higher for obese individuals, compared with those classified as underweight/normal weight. Concurrent obesity and joint disease had a marked impact on several key aspects of wellbeing, highlighting the need for public health interventions.

Decline in Health-Related Quality of Life reported by more than half of those waiting for joint replacement surgery: a prospective cohort study

BackgroundIn many healthcare systems, people with severe joint disease wait months to years for joint replacement surgery. There are little empirical data on the health consequences of this delay and it is unclear whether people with substantial morbidity at entry to the waiting list continue to deteriorate further while awaiting surgery. This study investigated changes in Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), health status and psychological distress among people waiting for total hip (THR) and knee replacement (TKR) surgery at a major metropolitan Australian public hospital.Methods134 patients completed questionnaires including the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Kessler Psychological Distress Scale after entering an orthopaedic waiting list (baseline) and before surgery (preadmission). To quantify potential decline in wellbeing, we calculated the proportion of people experiencing clinically important deterioration using published guidelines and compared HRQoL and psychological distress outcomes with population norms.ResultsMost participants (69%) waited ≥6 months for surgery (median 286 days, IQR 169-375 days). Despite poor physical and psychological wellbeing at baseline, there was an overall deterioration in HRQoL during the waiting period (mean AQoL change -0.04, 95%CI -0.08 to -0.01), with 53% of participants experiencing decline in HRQoL (≥0.04 AQoL units). HRQoL prior to surgery remained substantially lower than Australian population norms (mean sample AQoL 0.37, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.42 vs mean population AQoL 0.83, 95%CI 0.82 to 0.84). Twenty-five per cent of participants showed decline in health status (≥9.6 WOMAC units) over the waiting period and prevalence of high psychological distress remained high at preadmission (RR 3.5, 95%CI 2.8 to 4.5). Most participants considered their pain (84%), fatigue (76%), quality of life (73%) and confidence in managing their health (55%) had worsened while waiting for surgery.ConclusionsDespite substantial initial morbidity, over half of the participants awaiting joint replacement experienced deterioration in HRQoL during the waiting period. These data provide much-needed evidence to guide health professionals and policymakers in the design of care pathways and resource allocation for people who require joint replacement surgery.

Variation in age and physical status prior to total knee and hip replacement surgery : a comparison of centers in Australia and Europe

OBJECTIVE To investigate whether variation exists in the preoperative age, pain, stiffness, and physical function of people undergoing total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) at several centers in Australia and Europe. METHODS Individual Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index data (range 0-100, where 0 = best and 100 = worst) collected within 6 weeks prior to primary TKR and THR were extracted from 16 centers (n = 2,835) according to specified eligibility criteria. Analysis of covariance was used to evaluate differences in pain, stiffness, and physical function between centers, with adjustment for age and sex. RESULTS There was marked variation in the age of people undergoing surgery between the centers (TKR mean age 67-73 years; F[6,1004] = 4.21, P < 0.01, and THR mean age 63-72 years; F[14,1807] = 7.27, P < 0.01). Large differences in preoperative status were observed between centers, most notably for pain (TKR adjusted mean pain 52.5-61.1; F[6,1002] = 4.26, P < 0.01, and THR adjusted mean pain 49.2-65.7; F[14,1802] = 8.44, P < 0.01) and physical function (TKR adjusted mean function 52.7-61.4; F[6,1002] = 5.27, P < 0.01, and THR adjusted mean function 53.3-71.0; F[14,1802] = 6.71, P < 0.01). Large effect sizes (up to 0.98) reflect the magnitude of variation between centers and highlight the clinical relevance of these findings. CONCLUSION The large variations in age and preoperative status indicate substantial differences in the timing of joint replacement across the centers studied, with potential for compromised surgical outcomes due to premature or delayed surgery. Possible contributing factors include patient preferences, the absence of concrete indications for surgery, and the capacity of the health care systems.

Quality of life in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Physical and psychological impairments impacting quality of life (QOL) are common following ACL reconstruction. Rehabilitation alone is an effective alternative to reconstruction for some patients, warranting the investigation of QOL in ACL-deficient individuals. Purpose To report and compare QOL in ACL-deficient individuals with population norms and ACL-reconstructed groups, and investigate relationships between participant characteristics and QOL. Study design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods We systematically identified and methodologically appraised all studies reporting QOL in ACL-deficient individuals ≥5 years following ACL rupture. Knee-related and health-related QOL scores in ACL-deficient cohorts were compared to ACL-reconstructed groups using a random-effects meta-analysis. Descriptive comparisons were made with population norms. Results Eleven studies reported QOL in 473 ACL-deficient individuals, a mean of 10 (range 5–23) years following ACL rupture. Eight studies reported knee-related QOL using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score QOL subscale (KOOS-QOL); scores (mean±SD) ranging from 54±17 to 77±22 were impaired compared to population norms. Health-related QOL, measured with the SF-36 domain scores in five studies, was similar to population norms, but impaired compared to physically active populations. Meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in KOOS-QOL (mean difference (95% CI) 2.9 (−3.3 to 9.1)) and SF-36 scores (for all SF-36 domains except Vitality) between ACL-deficient and ACL-reconstructed groups. Conclusions This systematic review found impaired knee-related QOL in ACL-deficient individuals ≥5 years after ACL rupture, compared to population norms. Meta-analysis revealed similar knee-related QOL in ACL-deficient and ACL-reconstructed groups, and no difference in health-related QOL scores for seven of the eight SF-36 domains.

Factors limiting participation in arthritis self-management programmes: an exploration of barriers and patient preferences within a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE To improve understanding of barriers to participation in community-based arthritis self-management programmes and patient preferences for self-management education. METHODS Individuals with hip or knee OA referred to orthopaedic surgeons or rheumatologists at six public and private hospitals in Victoria, Australia, were recruited for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the Stanford Arthritis Self-Management Programme (ASMP). As part of the study design, potential participants were asked during the screening and recruitment process about reasons for being unable to attend the course, reasons for not participating in the study and individual preferences for course scheduling. RESULTS Of 1125 individuals assessed, 216 (19%) were unable to attend six ASMP sessions. This was commonly due to physical limitations, including illness, restricted mobility and pain (22%), difficulty getting to or from courses (22%), work commitments (22%), the time commitment required (17%) and family roles (12%). Among those who did not want to participate in the study (n = 258), the overwhelming reason was disinterest (74%). Specific preferences for course scheduling were frequent, confirming the practical challenges faced in organizing courses for the RCT. CONCLUSION Incorporating patients from public and private settings, this study has elicited new insights into barriers to ASMP participation. Many people with hip or knee OA have limited capacity and motivation to attend community-based group programmes. Future self-management programmes and research should include more accessible options for those who cannot attend group-based programmes. Trial registration. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, http://www.anzctr.org.au/, ACTRN12606000174583.

Can a disease-specific education program augment self-management skills and improve Health-Related Quality of Life in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis?

BackgroundPatient education and self-management programs are offered in many countries to people with chronic conditions such as osteoarthritis (OA). The most well-known is the disease-specific Stanford Arthritis Self-Management Program (ASMP). While Australian and international clinical guidelines promote the concept of self-management for OA, there is currently little evidence to support the use of the ASMP. Several meta-analyses have reported that arthritis self-management programs had minimal or no effect on reducing pain and disability. However, previous studies have had methodological shortcomings including the use of outcome measures which do not accurately reflect program goals. Additionally, limited cost-effectiveness analyses have been undertaken and the cost-utility of the program has not been explored.Methods/designThis study is a randomised controlled trial to determine the efficacy (in terms of Health-Related Quality of Life and self-management skills) and cost-utility of a 6-week group-based Stanford ASMP for people with hip or knee OA.Six hundred participants referred to an orthopaedic surgeon or rheumatologist for hip or knee OA will be recruited from outpatient clinics at 2 public hospitals and community-based private practices within 2 private hospital settings in Victoria, Australia. Participants must be 18 years or over, fluent in English and able to attend ASMP sessions. Exclusion criteria include cognitive dysfunction, previous participation in self-management programs and placement on a waiting list for joint replacement surgery or scheduled joint replacement.Eligible, consenting participants will be randomised to an intervention group (who receive the ASMP and an arthritis self-management book) or a control group (who receive the book only). Follow-up will be at 6 weeks, 3 months and 12 months using standardised self-report measures. The primary outcome is Health-Related Quality of Life at 12 months, measured using the Assessment of Quality of Life instrument. Secondary outcome measures include the Health Education Impact Questionnaire, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (pain subscale and total scores), Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and the Hip and Knee Multi-Attribute Priority Tool. Cost-utility analyses will be undertaken using administrative records and self-report data. A subgroup of 100 participants will undergo qualitative interviews to explore the broader potential impacts of the ASMP.DiscussionUsing an innovative design combining both quantitative and qualitative components, this project will provide high quality data to facilitate evidence-based recommendations regarding the ASMP.

Chronic Disease Management A Review of Current Performance Across Quality of Care Domains and Opportunities for Improving Osteoarthritis Care

Osteoarthritis is the most prevalent chronic joint disease worldwide. The incidence and prevalence are increasing as the population ages and lifestyle risk factors such as obesity increase. There are several evidence-based clinical practice guidelines available to guide clinician decision making, but there is evidence that care provided is suboptimal across all domains of quality: effectiveness, safety, timeliness and appropriateness, patient-centered care, and efficiency. System, clinician, and patient barriers to optimizing care need to be addressed. Innovative models designed to meet patient needs and those that harness social networks must be developed, especially to support those with mild to moderate disease.