Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Patient perspective of hand osteoarthritis in relation to concepts covered by instruments measuring functioning - A qualitative European multi-centre study
  1. Tanja A Stamm (tanja.stamm{at}meduniwien.ac.at)
  1. Medical University of Vienna, Austria
    1. Florus Van der Giesen (f.j.van_der_giesen{at}lumc.nl)
    1. Leiden University Medical Center, Netherlands
      1. Carina A Thorstensson (carina.thorstensson{at}spenshult.se)
      1. Lund University, Sweden
        1. Eldri Steen (eldri.steen{at}diakonsyk.no)
        1. Diakonhjemmet Hospital Oslo, Norway
          1. Fraser Birrell (fraser.birrell{at}newcastle.ac.uk)
          1. Newcastle University, United Kingdom
            1. Bettina Bauernfeind (bettina.bauernfeind{at}meduniwien.ac.at)
            1. Medical University of Vienna, Austria
              1. Nicola Marshall (nicola.marshall{at}nuth.nhs.uk)
              1. Newcastle University, United Kingdom
                1. Birgit Prodinger (birgit.prodinger{at}meduniwien.ac.at)
                1. Medical University of Vienna, Austria
                  1. Klaus Machold (klaus.machold{at}meduniwien.ac.at)
                  1. Medical University of Vienna, Austria
                    1. Josef S Smolen (josef.smolen{at}wienkav.at)
                    1. Medical University of Vienna, Austria
                      1. Margreet Kloppenburg (g.kloppenburg{at}lumc.nl)
                      1. Leiden University Medical Center, Netherlands

                        Abstract

                        Objective: The aim of this study was to explore whether the concepts important to patients with hand OA are covered by the most commonly used instruments measuring functioning.

                        Method: A qualitative multi-centre study using focus group technique was performed in the following 5 European countries: Austria, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and 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 to the content of the most commonly used instruments which had been identified in an earlier theoretical analysis.

                        Results: Fifty-six people (91% women, mean age 62.7 ± 7.9 years) with hand OA participated in the present study in two focus groups per centre. 63 concepts were extracted from the focus groups. Nineteen (30%) of all 63 concepts were covered by at least one instrument. Psychological consequences, different qualities of pain, aesthetic changes and leisure activities may represent important concepts from the focus groups which were found to be 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 range of concepts important to the people with hand OA are not fully represented in the most commonly used instruments.

                        Statistics from Altmetric.com

                        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.