Search

Background Joint replacement surgery has revolutionised the management of degenerative joint disease. Increasing demand for surgery and post-surgical reviews has overwhelmed orthopaedic services and, consequently, many centres have reduced or stopped follow-up. Such disinvestment is without an evidence base and raises questions regarding the consequences to patients. Objectives To produce evidence- and consensus-based recommendations as to how, when and on whom follow-up should be conducted. Our research question was ‘Is it safe to disinvest in mid- to late-term follow-up of hip and knee replacement?’. Methods The study comprised three complementary evidence synthesis work packages to inform a final consensus process. Work package 1 was a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness literature. Work package 2 used routine national data sets (i.e. the Clinical Practice Research Datalink–Hospital Episode Statistics, Hospital Episode Statistics–National Joint Registry–patient-reported outcome measures) to identify pre, peri and postoperative predictors of mid- to late-term revision, and prospective data from 560 patients to understand how patients present for revision surgery. Work package 3 used a Markov model to simulate the survival, health-related quality of life and NHS costs of patients following hip or knee replacement surgery. Finally, evidence from work packages 1–3 informed a face-to-face consensus panel, which involved 32 stakeholders. Results Our overarching statements are as follows: (1) these recommendations apply to post primary hip and knee replacement follow-up; (2) the 10-year time point in these recommendations is based on a lack of robust evidence beyond 10 years; and (3) in these recommendations, the term ‘complex cases’ refers to individual patient and surgical factors that may increase the risk of replacement failure. Our recommendations are as follows: for Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel 10A* (ODEP-10A*) minimum implants, it is safe to disinvest in routine follow-up from 1 to 10 years post non-complex hip and knee replacement provided that there is rapid access to orthopaedic review; (2) for ODEP-10A* minimum implants in complex cases or non-ODEP-10A* minimum implants, periodic follow-up post hip and knee replacement may be required from 1 to 10 years; (3) at 10 years post hip and knee replacement, clinical and radiographic evaluation is recommended; and (4) after 10 years post hip and knee replacement, frequency of further follow-up should be based on the 10-year assessment (note that ongoing rapid access to orthopaedic review is still required) [Stone M, Smith L, Kingsbury S, Czoski-Murray C, Judge A, Pinedo-Villanueva R, et al. Evidence-based follow-up recommendations following primary hip and knee arthroplasty (UK SAFE). Orthop Proc 2020;102–B:13. https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992X.2020.5.013]. Limitations The current absence of data beyond 10 years restricted the evidence base. Conclusions For ODEP-10A* prostheses, the UK SAFE programme demonstrated that it is safe to disinvest in routine follow-up in the 1- to 10-year period after non-complex hip and knee replacement. At 10 years, clinical and radiographic review is recommended. Complex cases, implants not meeting the 10A* criteria and follow-up after revision surgery are not covered by this recommendation. Future work The evidence base for follow-up after 10 years requires further evaluation. Further work should establish the most clinically effective and cost-effective model of delivering a rapid access service and evaluate alternative models for follow-up services, such as virtual clinics. Finally, the needs and outcomes of patients who are symptomatic but do not have appropriate follow-up should be investigated. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017053017. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Supplementary Data from Cdc7 Kinase Is a Predictor of Survival and a Novel Therapeutic Target in Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma

Purpose: There is a lack of prognostic and predictive biomarkers in epithelial ovarian carcinoma, and the targeting of oncogenic signaling pathways has had limited impact on patient survival in this highly heterogeneous disease. The origin licensing machinery, which renders chromosomes competent for DNA replication, acts as a convergence point for upstream signaling pathways. We tested the hypothesis that Cdc7 kinase, a core component of the licensing machinery, is predictive of clinical outcome and may constitute a novel therapeutic target in epithelial ovarian carcinoma.Experimental Design: A total of 143 cases of ovarian cancer and 5 cases of normal ovary were analyzed for Cdc7 protein expression dynamics and clinicopathologic features. To assess the therapeutic potential of Cdc7, expression was down-regulated by RNA interference in SKOV-3 and Caov-3 ovarian cancer cells.Results: Increased Cdc7 protein levels were significantly associated with arrested tumor differentiation (P = 0.004), advanced clinical stage (P = 0.01), genomic instability (P < 0.001), and accelerated cell cycle progression. Multivariate analysis shows that Cdc7 predicts disease-free survival independent of patient age, tumor grade and stage (hazard ratio, 2.03; confidence interval, 1.53-2.68; P < 0.001), with the hazard ratio for relapse increasing to 10.90 (confidence interval, 4.07-29.17) for the stages 3 to 4/upper Cdc7 tertile group relative to stages 1 to 2/lower Cdc7 tertile tumors. In SKOV-3 and Caov-3 cells, Cdc7 siRNA knockdown triggered high levels of apoptosis, whereas untransformed cells arrest in G1 phase and remain viable.Conclusions: Our findings show that Cdc7 kinase predicts survival and is a potent anticancer target in epithelial ovarian carcinoma, highlighting its potential as a predictor of susceptibility to small molecule kinase inhibitors currently in development.

Chronic, noninflammatory musculoskeletal pain is common in the aged population and management can be challenging for older people due to multimorbidity, social isolation, and physical frailty. The aim of this scoping review is to summarize and discuss the evidence related to home-based health care interventions for older adults, with chronic, musculoskeletal pain.A review of the literature using 8 electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database [PEDro], Scopus, and Web of Science) was performed, following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. English language published studies that assessed home-based health care intervention/s, in men and women 75 years and older, with chronic, noninflammatory musculoskeletal pain where included. Two authors independently reviewed the articles and extracted data into a preformulated chart.The database search identified 4722 studies of which 7 studies met the inclusion criteria. Six of the 7 studies were randomized controlled trials and 5 studies focused on a single-site pain. The type of home-based interventions in the included studies was physical therapy (n = 2), psychotherapy (n = 3), and multimodal therapy (combination of multiple therapies) (n = 2). Participation completion rate was more than 74% in 6 out of 7 studies. Most studies used pain and/or physical function as their primary outcome (n = 6). Music therapy showed a statistically significant reduction in visual analog scale score for pain, and there was a trend toward improvement of pain and function in the physical therapy studies. No significant differences in outcomes between intervention and control groups were observed in the multimodal studies.This review highlights the scarcity of evidence related to home-based health interventions in older people 75 years and older, living with chronic, noninflammatory musculoskeletal pain. The findings were that physical, psychotherapeutic, and multimodal interventions are usually well tolerated and can be delivered as a safe self-management option. There remains a substantial need for more high-quality research with wider range of home-based interventions and comprehensive assessment of outcomes for this age group.

IntroductionPersistent, knee pain is a common cause of disability. Education and exercise treatment are advocated in all clinical guidelines; however, the increasing prevalence of persistent knee pain presents challenges for health services regarding appropriate and scalable delivery of these treatments. Digital technologies may help address this, and this trial will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of two electronic-rehabilitation interventions: ‘My Knee UK’ and ‘Group E-Rehab’.Methods and analysisThis protocol describes a non-blinded, randomised feasibility trial with three parallel groups. The trial aims to recruit 90 participants (45 years or older) with a history of persistent knee pain consistent with a clinical diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 allocation ratio. The ‘My Knee UK’ intervention arm will receive a self-directed unsupervised internet-based home exercise programme plus short message service support (targeting exercise behaviour change) for 12 weeks; the ‘Group E-Rehab’ intervention arm will receive group-based physiotherapist-prescribed home exercises delivered via videoconferencing accompanied by internet-interactive educational sessions for 12 weeks; the control arm will receive usual physiotherapy care or continue with their usual self-management (depending on their recruitment path). Feasibility variables, patient-reported outcomes and clinical findings measured at baseline, 3 and 9 months will be assessed and integrated with qualitative interview data from a subset of Group E-Rehab and My Knee UK participants. If considered feasible and acceptable, a definitive randomised controlled trial can be conducted to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of one or both interventions with a view to implementation in routine care.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the West of Scotland Research Ethics Committee 5 (Reference: 20/WS/0006). The results of the study will be disseminated to study participants, the study grant funder and will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberISRCTN15564385.

Background Hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) affect a large and growing proportion of the population. Treatment options are typically conservative making self-management a priority. Using trained peers to support individuals with OA has potential to improve self-management. Purpose To explore the process of engaging and training volunteers to become peer mentors; and to qualitatively evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and value of being a peer mentor to support others' self-management of OA. Materials and methods A qualitative evaluation of a peer mentorship support intervention reporting the processes of recruitment and training; and semi-structured interviews conducted with nine active peer mentors. Transcribed interviews were coded and analysed using framework analysis. Results It was possible to recruit, train and retain volunteers with OA to become peer mentors. The peer mentors benefitted from their training and felt equipped to deliver the intervention. They enjoyed social elements of the mentorship intervention and gained satisfaction through delivering valued support to mentees. Peer mentors perceived the mentorship intervention to have a positive impact on self-management of OA for mentees. Conclusion Training volunteers with OA to become peer mentors was feasible and acceptable. Peer mentors perceived their support benefitted others with OA. They positively rated their experience of providing mentorship support.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThis study demonstrates that it is possible to recruit, train and engage older volunteers to become peer mentors for people with osteoarthritis.Training should highlight the significance of employing key self-management techniques such as goal-setting.Peer mentors acknowledged that they benefitted from training and delivering the mentorship intervention, and this impacted positively on their own osteoarthritis self-management.Careful consideration of matching mentors and mentees appears to enhance the success of mentorship support.Recognising the impact of mentorship support on mentees' self-management is central to peer mentors' sustained engagement with the intervention.

Background The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of using a non-absorbable biocompatible polyester patch to augment open repair of massive rotator cuff tears (Patch group) and compare outcomes with other treatment options (Non-patch group). Methods Participants referred to orthopaedic clinics for rotator cuff surgery were recruited. Choice of intervention (Patch or Non-patch) was based on patient preference and intra-operative findings. Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), and Constant score were completed at baseline and 6 months. Shoulder MRI was performed at baseline and 6 months to assess fat fraction and Goutallier classification pre- and post- treatment. Feasibility outcomes (including retention, consent and missing data) were assessed. Results Sixty-eight participants (29 in the Patch group, 39 in Non-patch group) were included (mean age 65.3 years). Conversion to consent (92.6%), missing data (0% at baseline), and attrition rate (16%) were deemed successful feasibility endpoints. There was significant improvement in the Patch group compared to Non-patch at 6 months in OSS (difference in medians 9.76 (95% CI 2.25, 17.29) and SPADI: 22.97 (95% CI 3.02, 42.92), with no substantive differences in Constant score. The patch group had a higher proportion of participants improving greater than MCID for OSS (78% vs 62%) and SPADI (63% vs 50%) respectively. Analysis of the 48 paired MRIs demonstrated a slight increase in the fat fraction for supraspinatus (53 to 55%), and infraspinatus (26 to 29%) at 6 months. These differences were similar and in the same direction when the participants were analysed by treatment group. The Goutallier score remained the same or worsened one grade in both groups equally. Conclusions This study indicates that a definitive clinical trial investigating the use of a non-absorbable patch to augment repair of massive rotator cuff tears is feasible. In such patients, the patch has the potential to improve shoulder symptoms at 6 months. Trial registration ISRCTN, ISRCTN79844053, Registered 15th October 2014 (retrospectively registered).

Background Hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) are common musculoskeletal conditions. Treatment is usually conservative, making self-management a priority. We developed and trialled an OA peer mentorship intervention to support self-management in older people. Our objectives were to gain understanding of the perceived challenges of living with OA and explore how a peer mentorship intervention can support tackling these challenges; and to explore mentees' experiences of receiving the intervention to understand how this affected their OA self-management. Methods Qualitative semi-structured interviews focussing on acceptability and feasibility of being in the study were conducted with mentees. Transcribed interviews were double coded and subject to framework analysis. To address the objectives of this paper, three main themes were subject to focused analysis: mentees' experiences of OA, experience of peer mentorship support and factors influencing self-management. Results Seventeen mentees participated in an interview following completion of the peer support intervention. Themes emerging from focused analysis were the following: tackling the challenges of living with OA pre- and post-intervention; and the interplay of the peer mentorship intervention and self-management. Key elements of the latter theme are enabling factors provided by peer mentorship, and mentees' readiness to self-manage. Conclusion To effectively support OA self-management, peer mentorship interventions should include core educational components and focus on strategies that enhance key enablers of self-management. Paying attention to the mentor–mentee relationship and timing of intervention engagement can maximise opportunities for older people to adjust and transition from supported to independent self-management.

ObjectiveTo determine the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a peer mentorship intervention to improve self-management of osteoarthritis (OA).DesignSix-month parallel group non-blinded randomised feasibility trial.SettingOne secondary care and one primary care UK National Health Service Trust.ParticipantsFifty adults aged ≥55 years old with hip and/or knee OA.InterventionsParticipants were allocated 1:1 to the intervention or control group using an online randomisation service. Intervention group participants received usual care (information resources) and up to eight community-based self-management support sessions delivered by a peer mentor (trained volunteer with hip and/or knee OA). Control group participants received usual care only.Outcome measuresKey feasibility outcomes were participant and peer mentor recruitment and attrition, intervention completion and the sample size required for a definitive RCT. Based on these feasibility outcomes, four success criteria for proceeding to a definitive RCT were prespecified. Patient-reported outcomes were collected via questionnaires at baseline, 8 weeks and 6 months.ResultsNinety-six individuals were screened, 65 were eligible and 50 were randomised (25 per group). Of the 24 participants who commenced the intervention, 20 completed it. Four participants did not complete the 6-month questionnaire. Twenty-one individuals were eligible for the peer mentor role, 15 were trained and 5 withdrew prior to being matched with a participant. No intervention-related harms occurred. Allowing for 20% attrition, the sample size required for a definitive RCT was calculated as 170 participants. The intervention group showed improvements in self-management compared with the control group.ConclusionsThe feasibility outcomes achieved the prespecified criteria for proceeding to an RCT. The exploratory analyses suggest peer mentorship may improve OA self-management. An RCT of the OA peer mentorship intervention is therefore warranted with minor modifications to the intervention and trial procedures.Trial registration numberISRCTN:50675542.

This prospective study aimed to determine the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) cut-off for the patient reported outcome measure shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI), and evaluate predictors of PASS achievement following standard shoulder care. Patients with shoulder pain, referred for shoulder ultrasound were recruited from a community cohort. Patients completed both SPADI (scored 0–130) and a question on symptom state and followed-up at 6 months. PASS was calculated from Rasch-transformed scores using 2 methods: the 75th percentile of the cumulative response curve and the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with PASS. 304 participants (169 females, mean age 57.2 years) were included. At 6 months, 193 (63%) reported PASS. The association between SPADI at 6 months and PASS depended on baseline SPADI (interaction p = 0.036). Those with higher baseline scores had higher 6 months PASS cut-offs. Using the 75th percentile method, the 6 months total SPADI cut-off was 49.2 in those starting in the highest tertile at baseline compared to 39.4 in the lowest tertile: 46.4 vs. 36.7 for pain, 46.8 vs. 25.1 for disability. The ROC method yielded similar results. We have shown for the first time that the PASS cut-off for SPADI is dependent on baseline severity scores. Understanding the SPADI PASS threshold is important for clinical research to allow standardised reporting of shoulder intervention success at the patient level.

Objectives To assess whether modern management of RA has reduced the prescription of oral corticosteroids and NSAIDs and to evaluate use of pharmacological prophylaxis strategies. Methods Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we explored long-term (≥3/12 months; ≥6/12 in sub-analyses) DMARD, corticosteroid and NSAID prescribing (annually, in the year post-diagnosis and across the patient’s life course to 15 years post-diagnosis), annual proportion with co-prescribing for prophylaxis of associated bone (corticosteroids, women only) and gastrointestinal (NSAIDs) comorbidity. Results Reported incidence of RA was 5.98 (0.37) per 10 000 person-years and prevalence was 0.91% (0.014) in 2017. In 71 411 RA patients, long-term DMARD prescribing initially rose post-diagnosis from 41.6% in 1998 to 67.9% in 2009. Corticosteroid prescribing changed little, overall [22.2% in 1998, 19.1% in 2016; incident risk ratio (IRR) 0.92, 95% CI: 0.82, 1.03] and across the life course from the first to fifteenth year (22.2% to 16.9%). NSAID prescribing declined from 57.7% in 1998, and significantly so from 2008, to 27.1% in 2016 (IRR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.56). This continued across the life course (41.2% to 28.4%). Bone prophylaxis increased to 68.1% in 2008 before declining to 56.4% in 2017; gastrointestinal prophylaxis increased from 11.5% in 1998 to 62.6% in 2017. Sub-analyses showed consistent patterns. Conclusion Despite modern treatment strategies, corticosteroid prescribing in RA patients remains substantial and persists beyond 6 months once initiated. Rheumatologists need to determine causes and develop strategies to reduce corticosteroid use to minimize adverse event occurrence.

Background Over 20 years, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management has evolved to immediate initiation and more effective escalation of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to suppress inflammation. We aimed to establish whether this has facilitated reduced long-term use of potentially toxic glucocorticosteroids (GCs) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Methods We investigated changes in DMARD, oral GC and NSAID prescribing over 1998-2017 in a UK primary care electronic health records database. We defined RA by coded diagnosis, sensitivity analyses requiring (a) two diagnoses ≥6 months apart; (b) ≥1 DMARD prescriptions. We calculated annual RA incidence and prevalence, annual prescribing and prescribing in the first to fifteenth year from diagnosis. Long-term prescribing was defined as ≥ 3 months (≥6 in a sensitivity analyses) and compared with a non-RA cohort (5:1 matched on age, sex and GP practice). Results We included 71,411 RA patients (44,426 with 2 diagnoses, 45,438 with DMARD). Incidence declined from 5.01 (±0.36) per 10,000 person-years in 1998 to 4.77 (±0.23) in 2011, before increasing following changes in Quality Outcomes Framework indicators. Prevalence rose from 0.70% (±0.013) in 1998 to 0.91% (±0.014) in 2017 and was highest among patients aged ≥70 (2.21%, ±0.05). Long-term DMARD prescribing rose from 30.97% in 1998 to 49.28% in 2017. Long-term NSAID prescribing fell (45.94% to 25.08%) particularly amongst incident RA patients, with only modest change in GCs (20.98% to 15.53%) (Table 1). By comparison, long-term GC prescribing in the matched non-RA population rose (0.90% to 2.01%) and NSAID prescribing changed little (6.37% to 8.41%). The proportion with long-term prescribing declined slightly from the first to the third year following diagnosis for GCs (22.18% to 17.87%) and NSAIDs (41.19% to 34.30%). Sensitivity analyses showed similar results. Conclusion Long-term GC prescribing among newly diagnosed RA patients has not appreciably reduced despite modern treatment paradigms and the expected observed increase in DMARD prescribing. Long-term NSAID prescribing did decrease in primary care for RA (especially from mid-2000 and among newly diagnosed patients), but interestingly, not for non-RA patients. Given the scope for further reduction in GC and NSAID prescribing, the reasons for persistent prescribing, including prescribing behaviours, require further investigation. Disclosures S.S.R. Crossfield: Grants/research support; Medical Research Council (MRC) Leeds Medical Bioinformatics Centre [MR/L01629X]. M.H. Buch: None. P. Baxter: None. S.R. Kingsbury: Grants/research support; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Leeds Biomedical Research Centre and the Versus Arthritis Experimental Osteoarthritis Treatment Centre [20083]. M. Pujades-Rodriguez: None. P.G. Conaghan: Grants/research support; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Leeds Biomedical Research Centre and the Versus Arthritis Experimental Osteoarthritis Treatment Centre [20083].

Background Patients’ pre-operative health and physical function is known to influence their post-operative outcomes. In patients with knee osteoarthritis, pharmacological and non-pharmacological options are often not optimised prior to joint replacement. This results in some patients undergoing surgery when they are not as fit as they could be. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a pre-operative package of non-operative care versus standard care prior to joint replacement. Methods/design This is a multicentre, randomised controlled feasibility trial of patients undergoing primary total knee replacement for osteoarthritis. Sixty patients will be recruited and randomised (2:1) to intervention or standard care arms. Data will be collected at baseline (before the start of the intervention), around the end of the intervention period and a minimum of 90 days after the planned date of surgery. Adherence will be reviewed each week during the intervention period (by telephone or in person). Participants will be randomised to a pre-operative package of non-operative care or standard care. The non-operative care will consist of (1) a weight-loss programme, (2) a set of exercises, (3) provision of advice on analgesia use and (4) provision of insoles. The intervention will be started as soon as possible after patients have been added to the waiting list for joint replacement surgery to take advantage of the incentive for behavioural change that this will create. The primary outcomes of this study are feasibility outcomes which will indicate whether the intervention and study protocol is feasible and acceptable and whether a full-scale effectiveness trial is warranted. The following will be measured and used to inform study feasibility: rate of recruitment, rate of retention at 90-day follow-up review after planned surgery date, and adherence to the intervention estimated through review questionnaires and weight change (for those receiving the weight-loss aspect of intervention). In addition the following information will be assessed qualitatively: analysis of qualitative interviews exploring acceptability, feasibility, adherence and possible barriers to implementing the intervention, and acceptability of the different outcome measures. Discussion The aims of the study specifically relate to testing the feasibility and acceptability of the proposed effectiveness trial intervention and the feasibility of the trial methods. This study forms the important first step in developing and assessing whether the intervention has the potential to be assessed in a future fully powered effectiveness trial. The findings will also be used to refine the design of the effectiveness trial. Trial registration ISRCTN registry, ID: ISRCTN96684272. Registered on 18 April 2018.

ObjectiveTo identify patients at risk of mid-late term revision of hip replacement to inform targeted follow-up.DesignAnalysis of linked national data sets from primary and secondary care (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD-GOLD); National Joint Registry (NJR); English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES); Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)).ParticipantsPrimary elective total hip replacement (THR) aged≥18.Event of interestRevision surgery≥5 years (mid-late term) after primary THR.Statistical methodsCox regression modelling to ascertain risk factors of mid-late term revision. HR and 95% CI assessed association of sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, medication, surgical variables and PROMs with mid-late term revision.ResultsNJR-HES-PROMs data were available from 2008 to 2011 on 142 275 THR; mean age 70.0 years and 61.9% female. CPRD GOLD-HES data covered 1995–2011 on 17 047 THR; mean age 68.4 years, 61.8% female. Patients had minimum 5 years postprimary surgery to end 2016. In NJR-HES-PROMS data, there were 3582 (2.5%) revisions, median time-to-revision after primary surgery 1.9 years (range 0.01–8.7), with 598 (0.4%) mid-late term revisions; in CPRD GOLD, 982 (5.8%) revisions, median time-to-revision 5.3 years (range 0–20), with 520 (3.1%) mid-late term revisions.Reduced risk of mid-late term revision was associated with older age at primary surgery (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.95 to 0.96); better 6-month postoperative pain/function scores (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.46); use of ceramic-on-ceramic (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.95) or ceramic-on-polyethylene (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.00) bearing surfaces.Increased risk of mid-late term revision was associated with the use of antidepressants (HR: 1.32; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.59), glucocorticoid injections (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.67) and femoral head size≥44 mm (HR: 2.56; 95% CI: 1.09 to 6.02)No association of gender, obesity or Index of Multiple Deprivation was observed.ConclusionThe risk of mid-late term THR is associated with age at primary surgery, 6-month postoperative pain and function and implant factors. Further work is needed to explore the associations with prescription medications observed in our data.

Background: Management of large and massive rotator cuff tears remains controversial. Such tears are often irreparable, and results of treatment are unpredictable. This study documents the current practice of orthopaedic surgeons in the British Elbow and Shoulder Society. Methods: A questionnaire was prepared pertaining to the management of large and massive rotator cuff tears with minimal degenerative changes in three age groups: Patients of 50 years (young), 65 years (still active), aged 75 years (elderly) were considered. Various risk factors for failure of repair were considered. Results: Physiotherapy and arthroscopic debridement were the most commonly selected management options in young and middle groups in cases of a large/massive rotator cuff tear. Patch repairs were offered by 30% of respondents overall. Latissimus dorsi transfer was utilised by 30%, 8% and 2% respectively in each age group. Reverse shoulder replacement was indicated by 8%, 36% and 76% respectively. Discussion: There was a marked inconsistency in the pre-op planning and number and choice of options between respondents. Most surgeons offered non-augmented repairs in a scenario where they admitted failure was likely. The need for a multicenter trial is widely recognised and 87% of respondents were willing to participate in such a trial.

Background: An economic evaluation alongside the Hydroxychloroquine Effectiveness in Reducing symptoms of hand Osteoarthritis (HERO) trial was undertaken to assess the cost-effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine compared with placebo for symptomatic treatment of hand osteoarthritis for patients with at least moderate hand pain and inadequate response to current therapies. Methods: A trial-based cost–utility analysis was undertaken from the perspective of the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services over a 12-month time horizon, using evidence from 248 participants included in the HERO trial, conducted in England. Patient-level data were collected prospectively over a 12-month period, using participant-completed questionnaires and investigator forms, to collect healthcare utilisation, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ-5D-5L. The base-case analysis was conducted on an intention-to-treat basis and used multiple imputation methods to deal with missing data. Results were presented in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (incremental cost per QALY) and net health benefit, with uncertainty surrounding the findings explored using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results: The base-case analysis estimated slightly lower costs on average (−£11.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) −£15.60 to −£8.00) and marginally fewer QALYs (−0.0052; 95% CI −0.0057 to −0.0047) for participants in the hydroxychloroquine group versus placebo group at 12 months. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £2,267 per QALY lost indicated that although costs were saved, health-related quality of life was lost. Even assuming symmetrical preferences regarding losses and gains for health benefits, the findings do not fall within the cost-effective region. Similar findings arose for analyses conducted from the societal perspective and using complete cases only. Conclusions: This economic evaluation indicates that hydroxychloroquine is unlikely to provide a cost-effective pain relief option for improving health-related quality of life in adult patients with moderate-to-severe hand osteoarthritis.

To systematically review the evidence to determine the clinical outcomes and the important methodological quality features of interventional studies on adults with non-inflammatory multi-joint pain (MJP). Systematic search of published and unpublished literature using the databases: AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, psycINFO, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, OpenGrey, the EU Clinical Trials Register, World Health Organization International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and the ISRCTN registry (search: inception to 19th October 2017). All papers reporting the clinical outcomes of non-pharmacological interventions for people with non-inflammatory MJP were included. Studies were critically appraised using the Downs and Black Critical Appraisal and the TIDieR reporting checklists. Data were analysed using a Best Evidence Synthesis approach. From 3824 citations, four papers satisfied the eligibility criteria. Three studies reported outcomes from multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes and one study reported the findings of a spa therapy intervention. All interventions significantly improved pain, function and quality of life in the short-term. There was limited reporting of measures for absenteeism, presenteeism and psychosocial outcomes. The evidence was ‘weak’, and due to a lack of controlled trials, there is limited evidence to ascertain treatment effectiveness. Design consideration for future trials surround improved reporting of participant characteristics, interventions and the standardisation of core outcome measures. There is insufficient high-quality trial data to determine the effectiveness of treatments for non-inflammatory MJP. Given the significant health burden which this condition presents on both individuals and wider society, developing and testing interventions and accurately reporting these, should be a research priority. Registration PROSPERO (CRD42013005888).

Aims This study aimed to develop a virtual clinic for the purpose of reducing face-to-face orthopaedic consultations. Patients and Methods Anonymized experts (hip and knee arthroplasty patients, surgeons, physiotherapists, radiologists, and arthroplasty practitioners) gave feedback via a Delphi Consensus Technique. This consisted of an iterative sequence of online surveys, during which virtual documents, made up of a patient-reported questionnaire, standardized radiology report, and decision-guiding algorithm, were modified until consensus was achieved. We tested the patient-reported questionnaire on seven patients in orthopaedic clinics using a ‘think-aloud’ process to capture difficulties with its completion. Results A patient-reported 13-item questionnaire was developed covering pain, mobility, and activity. The radiology report included up to ten items (e.g. progressive periprosthetic bone loss) depending on the type of arthroplasty. The algorithm concludes in one of three outcomes: review at surgeon’s discretion (three to 12 months); see at next available clinic; or long-term follow-up/discharge. Conclusion The virtual clinic approach with attendant documents achieved consensus by orthopaedic experts, radiologists, and patients. The robust development and testing of this standardized virtual clinic provided a sound platform for organizations in the United Kingdom to adopt a virtual clinic approach for follow-up of hip and knee arthroplasty patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:951–959.

Background:Shoulder pain is common and persistent, with a large socioeconomic burden. Ultrasound (US) scans are used for diagnosing and managing shoulder pain, but the extent to which it informs management and improves outcomes is unknown. A recent retrospective study identified groups with different patterns of US pathologies.Objectives:To confirm the existence of US-based groups of shoulder pain and determine if US-detected pathology (grouped or individual) predicts outcomes in the context of usual care. Response to local steroid injection was also evaluated.Methods:This was a 6 month, prospective, single centred, community based, observational cohort study. Inclusion: shoulder pain, ≥18 years, first shoulder US. Exclusion: shoulder surgery, inflammatory arthritis, steroid/physiotherapy in prior 6 weeks. Standardised reporting for 10 US pathologies was employed. Latent class analysis (LCA) identified pathology-based groups. Multiple linear regression analysis explored associations between baseline pathologies, subsequent treatment and 6-month Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). Growth mixture modelling (GMM) identified groups with common trajectories of change.Results:Of 500 patients (mean age 53.6; 52% female), 330 completed follow-up. LCA identified 4 groups: bursitis without acromioclavicular joint degeneration (ACJD) (group 1), bursitis with ACJD (group 2), rotator cuff tear (group 3), no bursitis/tear (group 4). SPADI was higher at baseline for tears (55.1 vs. 49.7-51.3) (overall p=0.005), but groups did not differ at 6 months (p=0.379) (Table 1). No individual pathologies predicted 6-month outcomes. Response to baseline injection at week 2 did not differ between groups (p=0.423). GMM found 4 trajectories; the majority of patients followed trajectory 1 (little change), irrespective of US pathology group (79%, 77%, 87%, 70% of US groups 1-4 respectively) (Figure 1).Conclusion:This is the largest prospective study involving US of symptomatic shoulders, and the first to investigate groups with distinct patterns of US pathologies in predicting outcome. US-based classification of pathology (as groups or individually) did not predict 6-month outcomes with current treatments and there were no differences in short-term response to steroids between groups. The role of routine diagnostic US for shoulder pain needs consideration; it may be useful if evidence-based therapies for specific pathologies are established.Table 1.Predictors of SPADI score at 6 monthsBaseline characteristicCoefficient* (95% CI), p-valuePathology group:Bursitis w/o ACJ degeneration (group 1)ReferenceBursitis with ACJ degeneration (group 2)0.08 (-5.15, 5.32), p=0.975RC tear (group 3)5.01 (-1.48, 11.50), p=0.130No bursitis, no RC tear (group 4)1.98 (-4.00, 7.96), p=0.516Injection at scan4.87 (0.40, 9.34), p=0.033Age, years-0.01 (-0.17, 0.15), p=0.898Female-1.51 (-5.42, 2.40), p=0.448Symptom duration, months0.00 (-0.04, 0.05), p=0.879Uses arms to rise from chair2.65 (-1.50, 6.81), p=0.210Physiotherapy before baseline-0.23 (-4.78, 4.31), p=0.9201 injection before baseline2.35 (-2.87, 7.56), p=0.377≥2 injections before baseline6.53 (-2.50, 15.57), p=0.156Total SPADI0.62 (0.35, 0.89), pShoulder activity score-0.59 (-1.15, -0.04), p=0.037P-SEQ score-0.20 (-0.46, 0.07), p=0.141Brief IPQ score0.19 (-0.16, 0.54), p=0.298HADS score0.01 (-0.38, 0.41), p=0.947Constant**35.44 (29.50, 41.38), p*Interpreted as unit difference in Rasch-transformed SPADI score per 1 additional unit of the independent variable **Estimated SPADI at 26 weeks in patients in the reference category for all categorical variables and with mean values for continuous covariates. ACJ=acromioclavicular joint; HADS=hospital anxiety and depression scale; IPQ=illness perception questionnaire; P-SEQ=pain self-efficacy questionnaire; RC=rotator cuff; SPADI=shoulder pain and disability indexFigure 1.Trajectories of total SPADI over time by the pathology groups found and response to injectionsAcknowledgements:This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Leeds Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) and by a NIHR Doctoral Research Fellowship (GT; DRF-2016-09-159). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. This study was also part-funded through the Arthritis Research UK Leeds Experimental Osteoarthritis Treatment Centre (20083).Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Background:Remote management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using patient self-assessment of disease and patient-reported outcomes has potential to inform timely clinical decisions on disease management, reduce burden on busy rheumatology services and promote effective self-management. However, it is unclear how patients’ self-reporting relates to treatment decisions.Objectives:To determine the agreement between remote treatment decisions based on patient self-assessment questionnaire assessed blindly by a health professional and treatment decisions based on routine outpatient monitoring appointments.Methods:This was a prospective real-world study including patients (who gave informed consent) enrolled in an observational study of RA patients starting a new biologic therapy.Enrolled patients continued with their usual care and usual clinic monitoring. In addition, they completed at home, self-assessment questionnaires at monthly intervals, including: two self-reported components which are collected as part of routine clinical practice (joint stiffness and flare), visual analogue scales for pain, global health and fatigue; and HAQ-DI and self-efficacy scales (Arthritis Self-Efficacy Pain and Other Symptoms subscales) at inclusion visits, 12 and 24 months.Remote treatment decisions were made by an independent (blinded) health professional, based on the self-assessment questionnaires and information collected in the study: medical history, ongoing therapies for RA, clinical outcomes, adverse events and toxicity. In this analysis, the independent blinded clinician did not have the same information as the routine hospital visit clinician (blood results and joints assessment).The remote decisions were matched with the hospital visit decisions (within 2 weeks) and the measure of agreement between the 2 raters (independent blinded health professional and clinician at outpatient appointment) were evaluated using kappa coefficient: Results:A total of 72 RA patients were recruited into the sub-study: mean (SD) age 57.8 (11.6), disease duration 11.7 (10.3) and 52 (87%) were female. The pre-categorised remote decisions were: no change to biologic, stop biologic, add concomitant DMARD, reduction/removal of a concomitant DMARD and bring in for review. There were 57 matched decisions between the independent health professional and the outpatient clinicians. The outpatient clinician made 7 changes to biologic and 18 non-biologic therapy changes, while the remote health professional made 1 change to biologic and 17 changes to a non-biologic DMARD including bringing in for review. The self-assessment questionnaires reported 34 RA flares of which 21 had resolved. In the matched decisions, there was only one adverse event that needed stopping treatment, identified by both the remote and the outpatient treatment. The independent health professional and the outpatient clinician had a ‘fair’ agreement on changes to biologic therapy (Kappa = 0.226, p = 0.007) and overall changes to RA therapy (Kappa = 0.24, p = 0.07).Conclusion:Remote RA monitoring using patient self-assessment and outcome measures was feasible with fair agreement on treatment decisions. Further work is required on understanding the importance of adding blood test monitoring to remote decision-making.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Objective.To assess whether the “spread” of joint pain is related to pain-associated muscle loss in 1 joint leading to increased loading and subsequent pain in other joints.Methods.Associations between persistent knee pain (pain in 1 or 2 knees over 0–3 years vs no persistent pain) and incident shoulder pain at Year 4 were examined in participants from the longitudinal National Institutes of Health Osteoarthritis Initiative. Associations were assessed using log multinomial modeling, adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, depression score, other lower limb pain, and baseline leg weakness (difficulty standing from a sitting position).Results.In older adults with clinically significant knee osteoarthritis (OA) or at risk of knee OA (n = 3486), the number of painful joints increased yearly, from 2.1 joints (95% CI 2.0–2.2) at baseline increasing by 5.2% (95% CI 2.2–8.3) at Year 4. Shoulders were the next most commonly affected joints after knees (28.5%). Persistent pain in 1 or 2 knees increased risk of bilateral shoulder pain at Year 4 [1 knee: relative risk (RR) 1.59, 95% CI 0.97–2.61; 2 knees: RR 2.02, 95% CI 1.17–3.49] after adjustment for confounders. Further adjustment for leg weakness attenuated effect sizes (1 knee: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.60–2.11; 2 knees: RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.75–2.77), indicating mediation by functional leg weakness.Conclusion.Spread of joint pain is not random. Persistently painful knees predict new bilateral shoulder pain, which is likely mediated by leg weakness, suggesting that biomechanical factors influence the spread of pain.

Background Shoulder pain is common and its management remains challenging, often resulting in poor outcomes: 50% of people continue to have shoulder pain at 18 months. This may be in part due to inaccurate clinical diagnosis. Ultrasound offers accurate detection of pathology and its use is increasing. However, the relationship between ultrasound findings and clinical phenotype is unclear. Objectives A prospective study was undertaken to explore latent class groupings and explore the association between patient reported outcome measures and the different groups. Methods 500 primary care patients attending for shoulder ultrasound were prospectively recruited. Radiologists and sonographers underwent training to ensure standardised reporting. Baseline data was collected via self-reported questionnaires. Outcome measures collected included pain, function, quality of life, treatments received, activity, self-efficacy and levels of acceptable symptom states. These measures underwent Rasch analysis. Latent class analysis was undertaken to identify groups. Results Mean age was 53.6% and 52% were female. Latent class analysis confirmed the existence of 4 groups: limited bursitis; extensive inflammation; RC tears; limited pathology. The oldest age group were those with RC tears, and the youngest was those with limited bursitis. The rotator cuff tear group had the highest levels of pain and disability, and the lowest levels of acceptable symptom states. Those with limited pathology had the highest levels of acceptable symptom states. The extensive inflammation group had the lowest activity scores. Summary statistics for classes obtained prior to covariate adjustment (complete data only) Conclusions This study confirms that ultrasound pathologies cluster into groups. These groups appear to differ in symptom associations at baseline; expanding the LCA to include covariates will allow us to formally explore these associations. A longitudinal study will provide understanding of the relevance of these groups to long-term patient outcomes. Disclosure of Interest None declared

Background Shoulder pain is a very common musculoskeletal complaint and a significant contributor to disability and morbidity. Recovery can be slow and over 50% continue to have pain at 18 months. Shoulder pain has a significant negative impact on quality of life and poses a significant economic burden, with costs estimated to be €345 million per year in the UK alone. Modern imaging modalities can accurately detect soft-tissue pathologies and are increasingly used, but the relationship of imaging findings to patient symptoms remain unclear. Objectives Our aim was to systematically review the literature to determine what imaging features are associated with symptoms and their progression. Methods A systematic review using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane and grey literature was conducted to April 2017. The cross-sectional and longitudinal relationships between imaging-detected abnormalities and symptoms were analysed and associations qualitatively characterised by a best evidence synthesis based on study design, covariate adjustment and the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Modalities included ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), radiographs, positron emission tomography (PET), bone scintigraphy and computerised tomography (CT). Results 6569 abstracts were screened and 56 papers were included. 50 studies did not adjust for covariates. The majority of studies showed conflicting findings. There was no significant association between most imaging features (rotator cuff tears, tendinopathies, subacromial bursal pathologies, osteoarthritis, calcification, acromial pathologies and adhesive capsulitis) and symptoms amongst high quality, cross-sectional studies. There was low-quality evidence suggesting that enhancement of the joint capsule on MRI and increased uptake of the rotator cuff interval, anterior joint capsule or axillary recess on PET was associated with symptoms in adhesive capsulitis. Based on high-quality, unadjusted longitudinal studies, enlarging rotator cuff tears was associated with an increased incidence of pain. 20 out of 56 studies evaluated more than one pathology, but only one study examined the association of symptoms with a combination of pathologies. Conclusions There were conflicting results on the association of imaging features with shoulder symptoms and its persistence and the existing evidence was very low in quality. There may be some imaging features associated with adhesive capsulitis symptoms and increasing RC tear may be associated with incident shoulder symptoms. Further high quality studies are required to understand the relationship between imaging and symptoms. Disclosure of Interest None declared

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link. N/A

Objective Shoulder symptoms are common, and imaging is being increasingly used to help with management. However, the relationship between imaging and symptoms remains unclear. This review aims to understand the relationship between imaging‐detected pathologies, symptoms, and their persistence. Methods A systematic review using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and grey literature was conducted to April 2017. The cross‐sectional and longitudinal relationships between imaging‐detected abnormalities and symptoms were analyzed and associations qualitatively characterized by a best‐evidence synthesis based on study design, covariate adjustment, and the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Modalities included ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), radiographs, positron emission tomography (PET), bone scintigraphy, and computed tomography. Results A total of 6,569 abstracts was screened and 56 articles were included. In total, 50 studies did not adjust for covariates and 36 analyzed individual pathologies only. The majority of studies showed conflicting results. There was no significant association between most imaging features and symptoms among high‐quality, cross‐sectional studies. There was low‐quality evidence that enhancement of the joint capsule on MRI and increased uptake on PET were associated with symptoms in adhesive capsulitis. Based on high‐quality longitudinal studies, enlarging rotator cuff tears were associated with an increased incidence of symptoms. Conclusion There were conflicting results on the association of imaging features with shoulder symptoms and their persistence. The existing evidence was very low in quality, based on the GRADE methodology. Further high‐quality studies are required to understand the relationship between imaging and shoulder symptoms and to determine the appropriate role of imaging in care pathways.

Summary Objectives Meniscal pathology is integral to knee osteoarthritis (OA) and its progression; it provides a progression biomarker and a potential treatment target. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrates large heterogeneity in meniscal damage; this structural complexity means measurement is difficult. The aim of this study was to apply novel 3D image analysis to determine which meniscal pathologies demonstrated most change during OA progression. Methods Knee images were selected from the progression cohort of the Osteoarthritis Initiative choosing participants with risk factors for medial OA progression. Medial and lateral menisci were manually segmented then analysed using a statistical shape model of the tibia as a reference surface. Responsiveness was assessed at 1 year using standardised response means (SRMs) for four constructs: meniscal volume, extrusion volume, thickness and tibial coverage; anatomical sub-regions of these constructs were also explored. Results Paired images from 86 participants (median age 61.5, 49% female, 56% obese) were included. Reliability of the novel meniscal measurements was very good intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs all > 0.98). Meniscal volume and extrusion demonstrated no significant change. Moderate responsiveness was observed for medial meniscus thickness (SRM −0.35) and medial tibial coverage (SRM −0.36). No substantial change was seen for the lateral meniscus measures. Sub-region analysis did not improve responsiveness; while greater change was seen in the posterior medial compartment, it was associated with increased variance of the change. Conclusions The location of meniscal damage was consistently in the posterior medial region, and two measurements (thickness and tibial coverage) were most responsive. Meniscal measures should add to discriminatory power in OA progression assessment.