CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 95Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsMusculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation

Health Care Provision for Osteoarthritis: Concordance between What Patients Would like and What Health Professionals Think They Should Have

Open access
Mann, Cindy, Gooberman‐Hill, Rachael·2011·Arthritis Care & Research
DOI 10.1002/acr.20459
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: To explore the opinions of patients and health professionals about the provision of health care for people with osteoarthritis (OA) and possible service improvements. Methods: Qualitative methods were used to explore the opinions of patients and health professionals about existing OA care and possible changes in service provision. Sixteen patients with hip or knee OA took part in focus groups, and 12 health professionals from primary and secondary care were interviewed. Focus groups and interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed, and anonymized. Transcripts were analyzed using the Framework method. Results: The views of the patients and health professionals generally concurred. They felt that OA should receive more attention and better consistency of care. More information and education about the condition, diet, exercise, aids, and resources was needed at the time of diagnosis. Patients wanted more time, better continuity, and proactive followup from general practitioners, with less variation in accessing joint replacement. Participants suggested access on demand to an “OA specialist” in primary care and the use of a management model comparable to other long‐term conditions. Both patients and health professionals wanted better support for self‐management to help patients manage their condition more effectively and appropriately. Conclusion: Patients and health professionals perceived similar problems with OA care. More proactive care and improved information, especially for those with early OA, might achieve better outcomes. Access to a primary care OA specialist might provide better continuity of care, enable patients to meet their needs for information, support, and self‐management, as well as improve appropriate referral to other resources.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acr.20459

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This understanding can help prevent diagnostic errors and receive timely and effective care.

    “This understanding can help prevent diagnostic errors and receive timely and effective care [52,53].”

    From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [53]

    The Conclusion (p. 5) says improved information and more proactive osteoarthritis care might lead to better outcomes, and that access to a specialist might improve appropriate referral. This supports the possibility of better care, but the paper does not say that such understanding prevents diagnostic errors or ensures timely care. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 41 · Cited by 95

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. [1]1. Hosie G, Dickson J. Managing osteoarthritis in primary care. Oxford; Blackwell Science 2000.
  2. [3]3. Creamer P, Hochberg MC. Why does osteoarthritis of the knee hurt sometimes? British Journal of Rheumatology 1997; 36(7): 726-728.
  3. [4]4. Gooberman-Hill R, Woolhead G, MacKichan F, Ayis S, Williams S, and Dieppe P. Assessing chronic joint pain: lessons from a focus group study. Arthritis Care and Research 2007; 57(4): 666-671.
  4. [5]5. Hawker GA, Stewart L, French MR, Cibere J, Jordan JM, March L, SuarezAlmazor M, and Gooberman-Hill R. Understanding the pain experience in hip and knee osteoarthritis - an OARSI/OMERACT initiative. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2008; 16(4): 415-422.
  5. [6]6. Woolhead G, Gooberman-Hill R, Dieppe P, Hawker G. Night pain in hip and knee osteoarthritis: a focus group study. Arthritis Care and Research 2010; 62(7): 944-949.
  6. [8]8. Tallon D, Chard J, Dieppe P. Exploring the priorities of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthritis Care and Research 2000; 13(5): 312-319.
  7. [10]10. Zhang W, Moskowitz RW, Nuki G et al. OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, Part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines. Osteoarthritis and cartilage 2008; 16(2): 137162.
  8. [11]11. Jordan KM, Arden NK, Doherty M et al. EULAR Recommendations 2003: an evidence based approach to the management of knee osteoarthritis: Report of a Task Force of the Standing Committee for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT). Annals of Rheumatic Diseases 2003; 62(12): 1145-1155.
  9. [14]14. Rosemann T, Wensing M, Joest K et al. Problems and needs for improving primary care of osteoarthritis patients; the views of patients, general practitioners and practice nurses. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2006; 7 (48). URL: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/7/48 .
  10. [15]15. Victor CR, Ross F, Axford J. Capturing lay perspectives in a randomised control trial of a health promotion intervention for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2004; 10(1): 63-70.
  11. [16]16. Wilcox S, Der Ananian C, Abbott J, et al. Perceived exercise barriers, enablers, and benefits among exercising and non-exercising adults with arthritis: results from a qualitative study. Arthritis Care and Research 2006; 55(4): 616-627.
  12. [17]17. Memel DS, Kirwan JR, Sharp DJ, Hehir M. General practitioners miss disability and anxiety as well as depression in their patients with osteoarthritis. British Journal of General Practice 2000; 50(457): 645-648.
  13. [18]18. Gignac MA, Davis AM, Hawker G et al. 'What do you expect? You're just getting older': a comparison of perceived osteoarthritis-related and agingrelated health experiences in middle- and older-age adults. Arthritis Care and Research 2006; 55(6): 905-912.
  14. [19]19. Parsons GE, Godfrey H, Jester RF. Living with severe osteoarthritis while awaiting hip and knee joint surgery. Musculoskeletal Care 2009; 7(2): 121135.
  15. [20]20. Sanders C, Donovan JL, Dieppe PA. Unmet need for joint replacement: a qualitative investigation of barriers to treatment among individuals with severe pain and disability of the hip and knee. Rheumatology 2004; 43(3): 353-357.
  16. [21]21. Ganz DA, Chang JT, Roth CP et al. Quality of osteoarthritis care for community-dwelling older adults. Arthritis Care and Research 2006; 55(2): 241-247.
  17. [22]22. McHugh GA, Silman AJ, Luker KA. Quality of care for people with osteoarthritis: a qualitative study. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2007; 16(7B): 168-176.
  18. [23]23. Sale JE, Gignac M, Hawker G. How "bad" does the pain have to be? A qualitative study examining adherence to pain medication in older adults with osteoarthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism 2006; 55(2): 272-278.
  19. [24]24. Crawford MJ, Rutter D, Manley C et al. Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. BMJ 2002; 325(7375): 1263.
  20. [25]25. Patrick H, Taylor F, Schwenke M, Jones E. Consultation with users, carers and staff in order to improve local palliative care services - how to do it and views on current services. Progress in Palliative Care 2007; 15(4): 177-181.
  21. [26]26. Bowland S, Hensley M, Johnson B, Fleming A. Consumer focus groups: a key to transforming behavioural health systems. International Journal of Mental Health 2010; 39(1): 16-28.
  22. [27]27. Bogart LM and Uyeda K. Community based participatory research: partnering with communities for effective and sustainable health behaviour interventions. Health Psychology 2009; 28(4): 391-393.
  23. [28]28. Hale ED, Treharne GJ, Kitas GD. Qualitative methodologies 1: asking research questions with reflexive insight. Musculoskeletal Care 2007; 5(3): 139-147.
  24. [29]29. Kitzinger J. Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. BMJ 1995; 311(7000): 299-302.
  25. [31]31. Bowling A. Research methods in health: investigating health and health services. 2 nd ed. Maidenhead; Open University Press 2002.
  26. [33]33. Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In Bryman A and Burgess RG ed: Analyzing qualitative data. London; Routledge 1994.
  27. [34]34. Larsson MEH, Nordholm LA, Öhrn I. Patients' views on responsibility for the management of musculoskeletal disorders - a qualitative study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2009; 10: 103. URL: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/10/103 .
  28. [35]35. Reimsma RP, Taal E, Kirwan JR, Rasker JJ. Systematic review of rheumatoid arthritis patient education. Arthritis Care and Research 2004; 51(6): 10451059.
  29. [36]36. Jones SP, Auton MF, Burton CR, Watkins CL. Engaging service users in the development of stroke services: an action research study. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2008; 17(10): 1270-1279.
  30. [41]41. Coar L, Sim J. Interviewing one's peers: methodological issues in a study of health professionals. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care 2006; 24(4): 251-256.

Authors
Mann, C., & Gooberman‐Hill, R.
Affiliations
  • North Bristol NHS Trust (GB)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-06-29
Volume
63
Issue
7
Pages
963-972
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-464X
  • 2151-4658
DOI
10.1002/acr.20459
OpenAlex
W2076019294
Cited by
95
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Arthritis Care & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-0407-10070)
  • North Bristol NHS Trust
  • Programme Grants for Applied Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
Keywords
osteoarthritis, hip osteoarthritis, knee osteoarthritis, health care delivery, continuity of care, self-management support, patient information and education, long-term condition management, patient perspectives, health professional perspectives
MeSH terms
Adult, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Osteoarthritis, Primary Health Care, Quality of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care, Patient Satisfaction, Qualitative Research, General Practitioners

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review