EXPECTATIONS AND NEEDS OF CONSERVATIVE OSTEOARTHRITIS PROGRAMS IN RURAL AUSTRIAN REGIONS

M. Suppanz¹, U. Halbreiner¹

¹Carinthian University of Applied Sciences, School of Health & Social Sciences, Klagenfurt, Austria

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is considered a major public health issue. Regarding to Safiri et al. (2020) the point prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) has increased by 9.3% (95% UI 8% - 10.7%) and the annual incidence by 8.2% (95% UI 7.1% - 9.4%) since 1990 in most countries. OA rates are expected to increase even more in the future. Therefore, enhancing population’s awareness of the importance of management strategies for OA is substantial.
Smith et al. (2013) recommend encouraging adherence of self-management principles. In this context, three established programs (Healthy Weight For Life (HWFL), Better management of patients with OsteoArthritis (BOA) and Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D)) should be mentioned, which differ in terms of settings, durations or offered interventions. It seems unclear which program fits best for Austrians in rural areas or what kind of adaptations are needed to set up programs fostering high adherence.

Purpose: Due to this gap in research, a crowdsourcing centered approach was chosen to identify needs, expectations, barriers as well as key characteristics regarding an OA-program tailored for rural populations in Austria.

Methods: A lecture in combination with a workshop focussing on knee OA (covered topics and content: definition, symptoms, pathophysiology, therapy options, existing programs- HWFL, BOA, GLA:D, sample exercises), in a rural community was organized to get in touch with the crowd. Following the lecture, the participants were asked to fill out a pen-and-paper survey voluntarily. The survey included one closed question about the favored program from the individual´s perspective of the presented three programs. Furthermore, three open questions about key characteristics of a personal ideal program, impeding and promoting factors concerning the participation of a program had to be answered.

Results: 26 participants (21 women and 5 men) between the ages of 33 and 86 years (M=61.46, SD=12.68) filled out the survey. Asked about the preferred program, 15 participants favored GLA:D, three BOA, two HWFL and one all of them (5 missing data). The most frequently named key characteristics and contents of a personal ideal program were exercise (n=10), nutrition (n=7), supervised sessions (n=5) and education (n=4). Technical issues (n=4, e.g. internet connection), idleness (n=2), pain (n=2) and difficult accessibility (n=2, e.g. time, place) were the most considered impeding factors concerning the participation of a program. The main promoting factors were supervised sessions (n=5), good accessibility (n=3, e.g. time, place), online setting (n=3), group setting (n=2) and face-to-face setting (n=2).

Conclusions: To conclude, an ideal OA- program for subjects in a rural Austrian region should include exercises, nutrition optimization and education. Furthermore, it should consist of a mix of face-to-face supervised and online sessions. Minimizing technical requirements, that are in general self-explanatory, as well as optimizing accessibility should be considered.

Implications: As our results indicate, there are existing working programs, however, adaptations of key characteristics may be necessary depending on the patient´s needs and expectations. To implement a tailored OA-program fostering adherence, physiotherapists should consider to start a crowdsourcing approach in the intended region first.

Funding acknowledgements: ZFF_1+ (internal funding from the own university - Carinthian University of Applied Sciences)

Keywords:
Conservative management of osteoarthritis
Crowdsourcing
Needs and expectations

Topics:
Orthopaedics
Musculoskeletal: lower limb
Health promotion & wellbeing/healthy ageing/physical activity

Did this work require ethics approval? No

Reason: Ethics committee was informed about the project and the implication of a survey under all interested and voluntary participants (signed informed consent included) and asked for the necessity of an ethics approval.

The answer was that an ethics approval for the project is not necessary. -> Email correspondence with the ethics committee chairman (9th of May, 2022)