Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29037845›Full record

Trial reportOsteoarthritis and cartilage2018

Implementing core NICE guidelines for osteoarthritis in primary care with a model consultation (MOSAICS): a cluster randomised controlled trial.

K S Dziedzic, E L Healey, M Porcheret, E K Afolabi, M Lewis, A Morden, C Jinks, G A McHugh, S Ryan, A Finney and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

K S DziedzicArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: k.s.dziedzic@keele.ac.uk.
E L HealeyArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: e.healey@keele.ac.uk.
M PorcheretArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: m.porcheret@keele.ac.uk.
E K AfolabiArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: ebenezer.afolabi@yahoo.com.
M LewisArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: a.m.lewis@keele.ac.uk.
A MordenSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Gloucestershire, UK. Electronic address: andym1_24@hotmail.com.
C JinksArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: c.jinks@keele.ac.uk.
G A McHughSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. Electronic address: G.A.McHugh@leeds.ac.uk.
S RyanThe Haywood Hospital, High Lane, Burslem, Stoke-on-Trent Staffordshire, ST6 7AG, UK. Electronic address: sarah.ryan2@ssotp.nhs.uk.
A FinneyArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: a.finney@keele.ac.uk.
C MainArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: profcmain@gmail.com.
J J EdwardsArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: j.j.edwards@keele.ac.uk.
Z PaskinsThe Haywood Hospital, High Lane, Burslem, Stoke-on-Trent Staffordshire, ST6 7AG, UK; Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: z.paskins@keele.ac.uk.
A Pushpa-RajahDermatology, King's College London, Tower Wing Guy's, London, WC2R 2LS, UK. Electronic address: angela.pushpa-rajah@kcl.ac.uk.
E M HayArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK. Electronic address: e.m.hay@keele.ac.uk.
Keele University · GBHaywood Community Hospital · GBKing's College London · GBUniversity of Gloucestershire · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Department of Health CAT CDRF 10-018Department of Health IAT/I-PF/010/009Department of Health KMRF-2014-03-002Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10386
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the effectiveness of a model osteoarthritis consultation, compared with usual care, on physical function and uptake of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) osteoarthritis recommendations, in adults ≥45 years consulting with peripheral joint pain in UK general practice.

methodTwo-arm cluster-randomised controlled trial with baseline health survey. Eight general practices in England.

participants525 adults ≥45 years consulting for peripheral joint pain, amongst 28,443 population survey recipients. Four intervention practices delivered the model osteoarthritis consultation to patients consulting with peripheral joint pain; four control practices continued usual care. The primary clinical outcome of the trial was the SF-12 physical component score (PCS) at 6 months; the main secondary outcome was uptake of NICE core recommendations by 6 months, measured by osteoarthritis quality indicators. A Linear Mixed Model was used to analyse clinical outcome data (SF-12 PCS). Differences in quality indicator outcomes were assessed using logistic regression.

results525 eligible participants were enrolled (mean age 67.3 years, SD 10.5; 59.6% female): 288 from intervention and 237 from control practices. There were no statistically significant differences in SF-12 PCS: mean difference at the 6-month primary endpoint was -0.37 (95% CI -2.32, 1.57). Uptake of core NICE recommendations by 6 months was statistically significantly higher in the intervention arm compared with control: e.g., increased written exercise information, 20.5% (7.9, 28.3).

conclusionWhilst uptake of core NICE recommendations was increased, there was no evidence of benefit of this intervention, as delivered in this pragmatic randomised trial, on the primary outcome of physical functioning at 6 months.

trial registrationISRCTN06984617.

Indexed as

AgedCluster AnalysisEnglandFemaleGeneral PracticeGuideline AdherenceHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritisPainPain MeasurementPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Education as TopicPhysician-Patient RelationsPractice Guidelines as TopicImplementationNICE guidelinesOsteoarthritisPrimary careQuality indicatorsSelf-management

Identifiers

PMID29037845
PMCPMC5759997
OpenAlexW2761132583

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.