↓ Skip to main content

Quality of hip and knee osteoarthritis management in primary health care in a Norwegian county: a cross-sectional survey

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quality of hip and knee osteoarthritis management in primary health care in a Norwegian county: a cross-sectional survey
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12913-014-0598-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gudmund Grønhaug, Nina Østerås, Kåre Birger Hagen

Abstract

BackgroundOsteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common causes of pain and disability in the adult population. Several studies have documented discordance between general practioners (GP) practice and management recommendations, but there is limited published information about patient reported experience of quality of care. The primary aim of this study was to assess the patient perceived quality of OA management in primary health care. Secondly, we wanted to explore the factors associated with the perceived quality of OA care.MethodsA cross-sectional survey in six general practices in the county of Nord-Trøndelag in Norway, patients with radiologically diagnosed OA, according to ICPC codes L89, L90 or L91 or clinical signs and symptoms corresponding to OA in the hip or knee and patient-reported quality of OA care on the 17-item OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator questionnaire (OA-QI). OA-QI summary pass rates were calculated, in which the numerator represents the number with indicators passed and the denominator represents the total number of eligible persons. Associations with summary pass rates were explored with demographic, disease related and health care related factors as independent variables.ResultsA total of 119 patients were included (response rate 42%). The median summary QI pass rate for all 17 QIs was 47% (Inter Quartile Range 33-65%), but there were large variation between the different items. The referral for weight reduction had the lowest pass rate (8%), whereas the highest pass rate was having received information about the importance of physical activity and exercise (84%). The median summary QI pass rates for both non-pharmacological- (QIs 1¿11) and pharmacological (QIs 13¿16) treatments were 50% (IQR 25¿75). In bivariate regression analyses, only overall treatment satisfaction was significantly associated with QI pass rate (p=0.001), with unstandardized beta=6.1 (95% CI 2.7 to 9.5), i.e. a one-point increase on the five-point satisfaction scale was associated with a 6% increase in pass rate.ConclusionConsidering that the median summary QI pass rate was 47%, there might be room for improvement in OA care. Advice and the referral of OA patients in need of weight reduction seem to have the greatest potential for improvement.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 16 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 18%
Psychology 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 20 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2014.
All research outputs
#4,168,445
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,952
of 7,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,079
of 361,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#27
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.