Article Text

PDF
The influence of consulting primary care on knee pain in older people: a prospective cohort study
  1. M Blagojevic,
  2. C Jinks,
  3. K P Jordan
  1. Primary Care Musculoskeletal Research Centre, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK
  1. M Blagojevic, Primary Care Musculoskeletal Research Centre, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Keele ST5 5BG, UK; m.blagojevic{at}cphc.keele.ac.uk

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether consulting a general practicioner (GP) in the 3 years after reporting knee pain is linked to better knee pain outcomes (reduced presence or severity of knee pain) at the end of the 3 year period.

Methods: We undertook a population-based cohort study linking baseline (2000) and follow-up (2003) surveys to primary care medical records. The cohort comprised 1577 adults aged 50 and over registered at 3 general practices in North Staffordshire, UK, who reported knee pain in a baseline survey. The main outcome measures were self-reported prevalence of knee pain and severity of knee pain in the follow-up survey. The relationship between consultation and future knee pain status was adjusted for an individual’s propensity to consult given related demographic and health-related factors.

Results: In persons who consulted for knee pain, 91% reported knee pain at 3 years, compared with 73% of those who did not consult (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.25; 95% CI 1.56 to 3.26). Among persons reporting severe knee pain or disability at baseline (n = 669), those who consulted for knee pain were more likely to report severe knee pain or disability at 3 years than those who did not consult (82% v 65%, adjusted OR 1.93; 95% CI 1.27 to 2.93).

Conclusions: Older adults with knee pain continue to have persistent problems regardless of whether they consult primary care or not. Further research is needed to identify more effective means of reducing the burden of knee pain in the community.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None declared.

  • Funding: The baseline survey was funded by The West Midlands New Blood Research Fellowship Committee (former West Midlands Regional Health Authority) and the Haywood Rheumatism Research and Development Foundation (HRRDF), North Staffordshire, UK. The follow-up survey was funded by the North Staffordshire Research and Development Consortium. All authors are independent of the funding bodies.

  • Ethics approval: The study was approved by the North Staffordshire Local Research Ethics Committee.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.