You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 73, Issue 1
  • International comparisons of the consultation prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions using population-based healthcare data from England and Sweden

Article Text

Article menu
Clinical and epidemiological research
Extended report
International comparisons of the consultation prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions using population-based healthcare data from England and Sweden
  1. Kelvin P Jordan1,
  2. Anna Jöud2,3,
  3. Charlotte Bergknut2,3,
  4. Peter Croft1,
  5. John J Edwards1,
  6. George Peat1,
  7. Ingemar F Petersson2,3,
  8. Aleksandra Turkiewicz2,
  9. Ross Wilkie1,
  10. Martin Englund2,3,4
  1. 1Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele University, Keele, UK
  2. 2Department of Orthopedics, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
  3. 3Epi-centre Skåne, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
  4. 4Clinical Epidemiology Research and Training Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kelvin P Jordan, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffs ST5 5BG, UK; k.p.jordan{at}keele.ac.uk

Abstract

Objectives To assess the consultation prevalence of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions as presented in different healthcare systems, and to determine the feasibility of comparing prevalence figures between nations.

Methods The settings were an English regional database (Consultations in Primary Care Archive (CiPCA)) and the Swedish Skåne County Health Care Register. Case definitions, data extraction and analysis procedures were harmonised. The number of people consulting per 10 000 registered population in primary care, and in primary or secondary care, in the year 2010 (annual consultation prevalence) were determined for doctor-diagnosed osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), low back pain, and spondyloarthritis including psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Seven-year period consultation prevalences were also determined.

Results Combining primary and secondary care, annual consultation prevalences of any MSK condition (2143 vs 1610/10 000) and low back pain (587 vs 294/10 000) were higher in England than in Sweden, but higher for RA, spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis in Sweden. Annual primary care prevalence figures for OA (176 vs 196/10 000), RA (25 vs 26/10 000), spondyloarthritis (both 8/10 000) and psoriatic arthritis (5 vs 3/10 000) were similar between England and Sweden. AS was rarely recorded in Swedish primary care. These patterns were also observed for 7-year period consultation prevalences.

Conclusions A rigorous methodological approach allowed feasible comparison of MSK consultation prevalence between England and Sweden. Differences in prevalence of inflammatory and unspecific pain conditions may be partially explained by known variations in healthcare systems and recording practice. Routine healthcare data offers potential for investigating variations in occurrence and outcome of MSK conditions between nations.

  • Epidemiology
  • Low Back Pain
  • Osteoarthritis
  • Rheumatoid Arthritis
  • Spondyloarthritis

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-202634

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.

    View Full Text

    Supplementary materials

    • Supplementary Data

      This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

      Files in this Data Supplement: