Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice (OMIRROP) in Australia: A Survey of Practice Style, Instrument Use, Responder Criteria, and State-Attainment Criteria

Bellamy, Elizabeth, Wilson, Cecilia and Bellamy, Nicholas (2009) Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice (OMIRROP) in Australia: A Survey of Practice Style, Instrument Use, Responder Criteria, and State-Attainment Criteria. Journal of Rheumatology, 36 5: 1049-1055. doi:10.3899/jrheum.080695


Author Bellamy, Elizabeth
Wilson, Cecilia
Bellamy, Nicholas
Title Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice (OMIRROP) in Australia: A Survey of Practice Style, Instrument Use, Responder Criteria, and State-Attainment Criteria
Journal name Journal of Rheumatology   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0315-162X
Publication date 2009-05-01
Year available 2009
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.3899/jrheum.080695
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
Volume 36
Issue 5
Start page 1049
End page 1055
Total pages 7
Editor Duncan A. Gordon
Place of publication Canada
Publisher Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co
Language eng
Subject C1
920204 Evaluation of Health Outcomes
111706 Epidemiology
Formatted abstract
Objective. The purpose of the 2007 Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice survey was to describe practice styles, instrument usage, and perceptions of responder criteria and state-attainment criteria in osteoarthritis (OA) management in routine clinical rheumatology practice.

Methods. A 16-item questionnaire (65 subcomponents) was developed, pretested, revised, formatted, and mailed to rheumatologists residing in Australia. Responses were obtained from 136 rheumatologists (response rate 58%).

Results. Approximately half the Australian respondents did not follow up their patients with hip and knee OA and two-thirds did not follow up their patients with hand OA. Health status measures (HSM) were infrequently used, even by those respondents who followed their patients with OA longitudinally, and the scores from those HSM that were used, were rarely if ever formally recorded. Respondents rated the following 6 requirements of a measure for use in clinical practice as very important: validity, reliability, responsiveness, simplicity, quick completion, and easy scoring. One-fifth to one-quarter of respondents indicated they did not know quantitatively what constituted a clinically important improvement, or a health state acceptable to patients with OA. The majority of the remainder selected values not closely aligned with published values in the peer review literature.

Conclusion. While simply describing the health status of the patient is interesting, the more strategic applications are in benchmarking, and using the data to inform shared decision-making and therapeutic goal-setting. The OMIRROP survey suggests that further investigation of interpretation issues are essential, before evaluating the role of quantitative measurement in routine OA clinical practice.
Keyword Responder Criteria
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: 2010 Higher Education Research Data Collection
School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 5 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 9 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Thu, 03 Sep 2009, 18:06:31 EST by Mr Andrew Martlew on behalf of National Research on Disability and Rehabilitation Medicine