Article Text

PDF
Extended report
Patient perspective of hand osteoarthritis in relation to concepts covered by instruments measuring functioning: a qualitative European multicentre study
  1. T Stamm1,
  2. F van der Giesen2,
  3. C Thorstensson3,
  4. E Steen4,
  5. F Birrell5,
  6. B Bauernfeind1,
  7. N Marshall5,
  8. B Prodinger1,
  9. K Machold1,
  10. J Smolen1,
  11. M Kloppenburg2
  1. 1
    Vienna Medical University, Department of Internal Medicine III, Division of Rheumatology, Vienna, Austria
  2. 2
    Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
  3. 3
    Research and Development Centre, Spenshult Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, Halmstad, Sweden
  4. 4
    Department of Rheumatology and National Resource Centre for Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway
  5. 5
    Newcastle University, Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr T Stamm, Vienna Medical University, Department of Internal Medicine III, Division of Rheumatology, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A–1090 Vienna, Austria; Tanja.Stamm{at}meduniwien.ac.at

Abstract

Objective: To explore whether the concepts important to patients with hand osteoarthritis (OA) are covered by the most commonly used instruments measuring functioning.

Method: A qualitative multicentre study using a focus group technique was performed in five European countries: Austria, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The qualitative data analysis followed a modified form of “meaning condensation” and used the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) as a theoretical framework. Finally, the concepts from the focus groups were compared with the content of the most commonly used instruments which had been identified in an earlier theoretical analysis.

Results: Fifty-six people (51 women, mean (SD) age 62.7 (7.9) years) with hand OA participated in this study in two focus groups per centre. 63 concepts were extracted from the focus groups. Twenty-one (33%) of the 63 concepts were covered by at least one instrument. Psychological consequences, different qualities of pain, aesthetic changes and leisure activities are important concepts from the focus groups which were not covered by the instruments. The qualitative analysis revealed detailed descriptions of pain-concerning sensations, levels and a certain relation to activity, none of which were fully represented in the instruments routinely used.

Conclusion: It was possible to combine the concepts of the focus groups from each centre into a common qualitative analysis. The concepts important to people with hand OA are not fully represented in the most commonly used instruments.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Funding This project was partly funded by a restricted grant from EULAR and by the DICHOA (Disease Characteristics in Hand OsteoArthritis) initiative.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval Ethics committee approval obtained.

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.