ArticleBMJ open2025
Barriers and facilitators to implementing core osteoarthritis treatments in China: a mixed-method study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bridging evidence and care for knee osteoarthritis in China: a randomized feasibility trial with RE-AIM-guided process evaluation of the PEAK-CHN model of care.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo understand current practices and identify barriers and facilitators to implementing guideline-recommended core osteoarthritis (OA) treatments in China.
designAn exploratory mixed-methods design
settingPublic and private clinical institutions across mainland China.
participantsA total of 498 healthcare professionals participated. The qualitative phase included semistructured interviews (n=15) and a qualitative survey (n=181). The quantitative phase consisted of a survey with 302 respondents across 19 provinces, representing seven health professions.
resultsFive themes identified as barriers during the qualitative phase: misconceptions about OA; limitations in current medical insurance policies; insufficient multidisciplinary collaboration; lack of workplace support and low patient adherence to self-management. Three themes identified as facilitators: telehealth and community-based delivery pathways; professional training and patient education resources; and personalised services with positive feedback. Quantitative findings showed that physical agent therapy (56%) and traditional Chinese medicine (22%) were the most frequently used OA treatments, while exercise therapy was implemented in only 9% of cases. The average OA knowledge score was 31.2 (±8.9) out of 55, with the lowest self-rated confidence in interdisciplinary collaboration (3.4±0.1, 'somewhat confident'). The most applicable factors impacting the implementation of core OA treatments included patient comorbidities, knowledge of pain science and exercise therapy, and financial support (all 2.8±0.8, 'applicable').
conclusionsThe uptake of core OA treatments in China remains suboptimal, constrained by limitations in insurance coverage, workforce capacity and interdisciplinary integration. Enhancing telehealth accessibility, strengthening professional training and refining policy incentives may help bridge this evidence-practice gap and improve OA management in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.