Osteoarthritis Musculoskeletal Diseases Osteoarthritis
Conditions
Interventions
WP1: A stakeholder co-design workshop with ongoing individual feedback will develop potential explanation statements within domains of the underpinning conceptual framework. Through a patient adapted
Sponsors
Keele University
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Work package 1 & 2: 1. Patients aged =47 2. Have consulted in their general practice in the last two years 3. Have a recorded consultation coded relating to osteoarthritis Work package 3: 1. Patients who responded with consent-to-future contact in earlier stages of the research will be eligible for inclusion. In this way we are ensuring that the patients have recently consulted with a problem pertaining to osteoarthritis 2. Lay people aged 45 years or older who do not have a diagnosis of osteoarthritis (and thus are potential future patients) 3. Healthcare professionals who, in their usual clinical roles, give diagnoses to patients with osteoarthritis. These are likely to include, but may not exclusively be, General Practitioners, Primary Care Nurses and Physiotherapists
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Work package 1 & 2: patients with 1. Severe mental illness 2. Rheumatoid arthritis 3. Psoriatic arthritis 4. Ankylosing spondylitis 5. Gout 6. Polymyalgia rheumatica 7. Moderate to severe learning disabilities 8. Dementia 9. Record that they lack capacity 10. Record that they are on the palliative care register 11. Recorded dissent to share their data 12. Inability to speak English Work package 3: 1. Patients will only be excluded if they indicate they no longer wish to participate or if they have developed any of the exclusion conditions since the original search 2. Lay people will excluded if they report that they have previously been diagnosed with osteoarthritis 3. Healthcare professionals will be excluded if, in their clinical role, they have not provided a diagnosis of osteoarthritis to a patient in the last 6 months
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| WP1 - Adapted nominal group technique to collect 11 prioritised explanation statements to be taken forward for testing in the conjoint analysis. WP2 - Partial-profile conjoint analysis questionnaire survey to ascertain the extent to which new, prioritised explanation statements are preferred over currently used/available statements for explaining OA WP3 - Think-aloud interviews to identify the necessary refinements required to develop the final core OA explanation and important additional statements WP4 - The early utility, acceptability and impact of PEP-OA measured using an on-line questionnaire and usage metrics gathered from the multimedia knowledge mobilisation package app | — |
Countries
United Kingdom
Outcome results
None listed