In higher income countries, social disadvantage is associated with higher arthritis prevalence; however, less is known about arthritis prevalence or determinants in low to middle income countries ...(LMICs). We assessed arthritis prevalence by age and sex, and marital status and occupation, as two key parameters of socioeconomic position (SEP), using data from the World Health Organization Study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE).
SAGE Wave 1 (2007-10) includes nationally-representative samples of older adults (≥50 yrs), plus smaller samples of adults aged 18-49 yrs., from China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russia and South Africa (n = 44,747). Arthritis was defined by self-reported healthcare professional diagnosis, and a symptom-based algorithm. Marital status and education were self-reported. Arthritis prevalence data were extracted for each country by 10-year age strata, sex and SEP. Country-specific survey weightings were applied and weighted prevalences calculated.
Self-reported (lifetime) diagnosed arthritis was reported by 5003 women and 2664 men (19.9% and 14.1%, respectively), whilst 1220 women and 594 men had current symptom-based arthritis (4.8% and 3.1%, respectively). For men, standardised arthritis rates were approximately two- to three-fold greater than for women. The highest rates were observed in Russia: 38% (95% CI 36%-39%) for men, and 17% (95% CI 14%-20%) for women. For both sexes and in all LMICs, arthritis was more prevalent among those with least education, and in separated/divorced/widowed women.
High arthritis prevalence in LMICs is concerning and may worsen poverty by impacting the ability to work and fulfil community roles. These findings have implications for national efforts to prioritise arthritis prevention and management, and improve healthcare access in LMICs.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Comprehensive national joint replacement registries with well-validated data offer unique opportunities for examining the potential future burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) at a population ...level. This study aimed to forecast the burden of primary total knee (TKR) and hip replacements (THR) performed for OA in Australia to the year 2030, and to model the impact of contrasting obesity scenarios on TKR burden.
De-identified TKR and THR data for 2003-2013 were obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Population projections and obesity trends were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, with public and private hospital costs sourced from the National Hospital Cost Data Collection. Procedure rates were projected according to two scenarios: (1) constant rate of surgery from 2013 onwards; and (2) continued growth in surgery rates based on 2003-2013 growth. Sensitivity analyses were used to estimate future TKR burden if: (1) obesity rates continued to increase linearly; or (2) 1-5% of the overweight or obese population attained a normal body mass index.
Based on recent growth, the incidence of TKR and THR for OA is estimated to rise by 276% and 208%, respectively, by 2030. The total cost to the healthcare system would be $AUD5.32 billion, of which $AUD3.54 billion relates to the private sector. Projected growth in obesity rates would result in 24,707 additional TKRs totalling $AUD521 million. A population-level reduction in obesity could result in up to 8062 fewer procedures and cost savings of up to $AUD170 million.
If surgery trends for OA continue, Australia faces an unsustainable joint replacement burden by 2030, with significant healthcare budget and health workforce implications. Strategies to reduce national obesity could produce important TKR savings.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Objective
To forecast the prevalence and direct health care costs of osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Australia to the year 2030.
Methods
An epidemiologic model of the Australian ...population was developed. Data on the national prevalence of OA and RA were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2014–2015 National Health Survey. Future prevalence was estimated using ABS population projections for 2020, 2025, and 2030. Available government data on direct health care expenditure for OA and RA were modeled to forecast costs (in Australian $) for the years 2020, 2025, and 2030, from the perspective of the Australian public health care system.
Results
The number of people with OA is expected to increase nationally from almost 2.2 million in 2015 to almost 3.1 million Australians in 2030. The number of people with RA is projected to increase from 422,309 in 2015 to 579,915 in 2030. Health care costs for OA were estimated to be over $2.1 billion in 2015; by the year 2030, these are forecast to exceed $2.9 billion ($970 for every person with the condition). Health care costs for RA were estimated to be over $550 million in 2015, including $273 million spent on biologic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs. Health care costs for RA are projected to rise to over $755 million by the year 2030.
Conclusion
OA and RA are costly conditions that will impose an increasing health care burden at the population level. These projections provide tangible data that can be used to map future health service provision to expected need.
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.
To report and compare QOL in ACL-deficient individuals with population norms and ACL-reconstructed groups, and investigate relationships between participant characteristics and QOL.
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
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.
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.
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.
No population-based studies have investigated how the impact of hip and knee joint disease may vary with increasing severity.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate health-related quality of life ...(HRQoL), work status, and health service utilization and costs according to severity of hip and knee joint disease.
A national cross-sectional survey was conducted.
Five thousand individuals were randomly selected from the Australian electoral roll and invited to complete a questionnaire to screen for doctor-diagnosed hip arthritis, hip osteoarthritis (OA), knee arthritis, and knee OA. Severity was classified by means of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores (range=0-100): <7=asymptomatic, 7-38=mild-moderate, and ≥39=severe. Health-related quality of life was evaluated by means of the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument (range=-0.04 to 1.00; scored worst-best). Self-reported data on work status and health service utilization were collected, with health care costs estimated with the use of government data.
Data were available for 1,157 participants, with 237 (20%) reporting hip or knee joint disease. Of these, 16% (n=37) were classified as asymptomatic, 51% (n=120) as mild-moderate, and 27% (n=64) as severe. The severe group reported very low HRQoL (adjusted mean AQoL=0.43, 95% confidence interval 95% CI=0.38-0.47) compared with the mild-moderate group (adjusted mean AQoL=0.72, 95% CI=0.69-0.75) and the asymptomatic group (adjusted mean AQoL=0.80, 95% CI=0.74-0.86). Compared with the asymptomatic group, the severe group was >3 times less likely to undertake paid work (adjusted odds ratio=0.28, 95% CI=0.09-0.88) and >4 times less likely to undertake unpaid work (adjusted odds ratio=0.24, 95% CI=0.10-0.62). Although physical therapy services were used infrequently, primary and specialist care utilization and costs were highest for the severe group.
Other costs (including physical therapy consultations) were unavailable.
A clear pattern of worsening HRQoL, reduced work participation, and higher medical care utilization was seen with increasing severity of joint disease.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, FSPLJ, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, OILJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VSZLJ
Abstract Questions: How do people with knee symptoms describe their quality of life and experiences 5 to 20 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR)? What factors impact upon the ...quality of life of these people? Design: Qualitative study. Participants: Seventeen people with knee symptoms 5 to 20 years after ACLR and high (n = 8) or low (n = 9) quality of life scores were recruited from a cross-sectional study. Methods: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted and transcribed. The data obtained from the interventions underwent inductive coding and thematic analysis. Results: Four consistent themes emerged from the interviews as common determinants of quality of life following ACLR: physical activity preferences; lifestyle modifications; adaptation and acceptance; and fear of re-injury. All participants described the importance of maintaining a physically active lifestyle and the relationship between physical activity and quality of life. Participants who avoided sport or activity reported experiencing reduced quality of life. Participants who suppressed or overcame re-injury fears to continue sport participation described experiencing a satisfactory quality of life while taking part in sport despite knee symptoms. For some participants, resuming competitive sport resulted in subsequent knee trauma, anterior cruciate ligament re-rupture or progressive deterioration of knee function, with negative impacts on quality of life following sport cessation. Participants who enjoyed recreational exercise often adapted their lifestyle early after ACLR, while others described adapting their lifestyle at a later stage to accommodate knee impairments; this was associated with feelings of acceptance and satisfaction, irrespective of knee symptoms. Conclusion: Activity preferences, lifestyle modifications and fear of re-injury influenced quality of life in people with knee symptoms up to 20 years following ACLR. People with a preference for competitive sport who do not enjoy recreational exercise might be at heightened risk of poor quality of life outcomes and could benefit from support to facilitate a transition to a physically active, satisfying lifestyle. Filbay SR, Crossley KM, Ackerman IN (2016) Activity preferences, lifestyle modifications and re-injury fears influence longer-term quality of life in people with knee symptoms following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a qualitative study. Journal of Physiotherapy 62: 103–110
Research 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).
A 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.
Data 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).
This 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.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
This study aimed to describe the use of revision knee arthroplasty in Australia and examine changes in lifetime risk over a decade.
De-identified individual-level data on all revision knee ...arthroplasties performed in Australia from 2007 to 2017 were obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Population data and life tables were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The lifetime risk of revision surgery was calculated for each year using a standardized formula. Separate calculations were undertaken for males and females.
In total, 43,188 revision knee arthroplasty procedures were performed in Australia during the study period, with a median age at surgery of 69 years (interquartile range (IQR) 62 to 76). In 2017, revision knee arthroplasty rates were highest for males aged 70 to 79 years (102.9 procedures per 100,000 population). Lifetime risk of revision knee arthroplasty for females increased slightly from 1.61% (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.53% to 1.69%) in 2007 to 2.22% (95% CI 2.13% to 2.31%) in 2017. A similar pattern was evident for males, with a lifetime risk of 1.43% (95% CI 1.36% to 1.51%) in 2007 and 2.02% (95% CI 1.93% to 2.11%) in 2017. A decline in procedures performed for loosening/lysis (from 41% in 2007 to 24% in 2017) and pain (from 14% to 9%) was evident, while infection became an increasingly common indication (from 19% in 2007 to 29% in 2017).
Well-validated national registry data can help us understand the epidemiology of revision knee arthroplasty, including changing clinical indications. Despite a small increase over a decade, the lifetime risk of revision knee arthroplasty in Australia is low at one in 45 females and one in 50 males. These methods offer a population-level approach to quantifying revision burden that can be used for ongoing national surveillance and between-country comparisons. Cite this article:
2022;104-B(5):613-619.
In 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.
134 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.
Most 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.
Despite 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.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Short-stay joint replacement programmes are used in many countries but there has been little scrutiny of safety outcomes in the literature. We aimed to systematically review evidence on the safety of ...short-stay programmes versus usual care for total hip (THR) and knee replacement (KR), and optimal patient selection.
A systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies including a comparator group reporting on 14 safety outcomes (hospital readmissions, reoperations, blood loss, emergency department visits, infection, mortality, neurovascular injury, other complications, periprosthetic fractures, postoperative falls, venous thromboembolism, wound complications, dislocation, stiffness) within 90 days postoperatively in adults ≥ 18 years undergoing primary THR or KR were included. Secondary outcomes were associations between patient demographics or clinical characteristics and patient outcomes. Four databases were searched between January 2000 and May 2023. Risk of bias and certainty of the evidence were assessed.
Forty-nine studies were included. Based upon low certainty RCT evidence, short-stay programmes may not reduce readmission (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.12-7.43); blood transfusion requirements (OR 1.75, 95% CI 0.27-11.36); neurovascular injury (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.01-7.92); other complications (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.26-1.53); or stiffness (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.53-2.05). For registry studies, there was no difference in readmission, infection, neurovascular injury, other complications, venous thromboembolism, or wound complications but there were reductions in mortality and dislocations. For interrupted time series studies, there was no difference in readmissions, reoperations, blood loss volume, emergency department visits, infection, mortality, or neurovascular injury; reduced odds of blood transfusion and other complications, but increased odds of periprosthetic fracture. For other observational studies, there was an increased risk of readmission, no difference in blood loss volume, infection, other complications, or wound complications, reduced odds of requiring blood transfusion, reduced mortality, and reduced venous thromboembolism. One study examined an outcome relevant to optimal patient selection; it reported comparable blood loss for short-stay male and female participants (p = 0.814).
There is low certainty evidence that short-stay programmes for THR and KR may have non-inferior 90-day safety outcomes. There is little evidence on factors informing optimal patient selection; this remains an important knowledge gap.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
