Abstract
Purpose (the aim of the study): To enable person-centered care, it is crucial to consider beliefs, needs, and priorities of individuals with osteoarthritis (OA). Nevertheless, concepts that are important to patients are not fully recapitulated in research and care. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to clarify how individuals with OA conceive, experience, and manage their OA and pain.
Methods: The study was part of the multinational and multidisciplinary Going inside Osteoarthritis-related Pain Phenotyping (GO-PAIN) working group. A systematic literature review of qualitative studies was conducted, including the Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Psycinfo, CNAIHL databases and the Cochrane library to identify all qualitative studies concerning OA-related pain up to October 2023. Using Rayyan, two investigators (SM and RG) independently selected potentially relevant articles and extracted the studies’ and OA patients’ characteristics. All the words or sentences expressed by OA patients and related to their pain were collected and merged in verbatim quotations and codes. Descriptive themes relating to these codes were defined. Finally, in thematic synthesis, overarching categories based on descriptive themes were used to identify analytic themes. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist.
Results: The seven databases yielded a total of 9,585 studies of which 79 qualitative studies were selected. We analyzed 667 verbatim quotations of 2,009 participants which led to 117 codes, and 24 themes. Themes were grouped into 2 categories, ‘features’ and ‘management’. The ‘features’ encompassed experiences related to OA ranging from common challenges to high impact outcomes needing therapeutic attention (Figure 1). The ‘management’ category captured experiences associated with self-management, psychoeducation, and interventions by health care professionals (Figure 2). Themes from both categories were classified into four domains: symptoms, function, psychological, and social. A fifth domain ‘disease’ was also used to categorize the themes under ‘features’. The median COREQ score was quite good at 21 [min-max: 8-32].
Conclusions: Several themes reported by patients are hardly represented in current assessment and recommendations, e.g., fatigue, sleep disturbance, psychosocial impact, and effects on family and caregivers. The current encompassing overview of beliefs, needs, priorities and other individual differences may support individualized screening, complement existing assessment instruments, and can help refine interventions and psychoeducational and self-help materials.
Methods: The study was part of the multinational and multidisciplinary Going inside Osteoarthritis-related Pain Phenotyping (GO-PAIN) working group. A systematic literature review of qualitative studies was conducted, including the Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Psycinfo, CNAIHL databases and the Cochrane library to identify all qualitative studies concerning OA-related pain up to October 2023. Using Rayyan, two investigators (SM and RG) independently selected potentially relevant articles and extracted the studies’ and OA patients’ characteristics. All the words or sentences expressed by OA patients and related to their pain were collected and merged in verbatim quotations and codes. Descriptive themes relating to these codes were defined. Finally, in thematic synthesis, overarching categories based on descriptive themes were used to identify analytic themes. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist.
Results: The seven databases yielded a total of 9,585 studies of which 79 qualitative studies were selected. We analyzed 667 verbatim quotations of 2,009 participants which led to 117 codes, and 24 themes. Themes were grouped into 2 categories, ‘features’ and ‘management’. The ‘features’ encompassed experiences related to OA ranging from common challenges to high impact outcomes needing therapeutic attention (Figure 1). The ‘management’ category captured experiences associated with self-management, psychoeducation, and interventions by health care professionals (Figure 2). Themes from both categories were classified into four domains: symptoms, function, psychological, and social. A fifth domain ‘disease’ was also used to categorize the themes under ‘features’. The median COREQ score was quite good at 21 [min-max: 8-32].
Conclusions: Several themes reported by patients are hardly represented in current assessment and recommendations, e.g., fatigue, sleep disturbance, psychosocial impact, and effects on family and caregivers. The current encompassing overview of beliefs, needs, priorities and other individual differences may support individualized screening, complement existing assessment instruments, and can help refine interventions and psychoeducational and self-help materials.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | S420-S421 |
| Journal | Osteoarthritis and Cartilage |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue number | Supplement |
| Publication status | Published - 2025 |