How Do People Communicate about Knee Osteoarthritis? A Discourse Analysis

Pain Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Bunzli ◽  
Nicholas Taylor ◽  
Penny O'Brien ◽  
Michelle Dowsey ◽  
Jason Wallis ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To explore the ways in which people talk about knee osteoarthritis and how this may influence engagement in physical activity and activity-based interventions as recommended by clinical practice guidelines. Design A qualitative synthesis using discourse analysis methods. Methods Systematic review methods were used to identify qualitative studies exploring the perceptions of people with knee osteoarthritis, their carers and/or clinicians. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Raw quotes extracted from each study were analysed using inductive discourse analysis. Results A search of five electronic databases from inception until August 2019 yielded 778 articles. Sixty-two articles from 56 studies were included, reporting data (1673 direct quotes) from people with knee osteoarthritis, carers and clinicians in 16 countries. Two overarching discourses were identified—impairment and participation. The overarching impairment discourse prevailed in all participant groups and study settings. In this discourse, knee osteoarthritis was likened to a machine that inevitably wore-down over time and required a doctor to repair. The overarching participatory discourse almost always co-existed alongside an impairment discourse. According to this discourse, a ′busy body′ was perceived as ′healthy′ and people could remain active despite knee osteoarthritis. Conclusion The prevailing impairment discourse may potentially discourage people from using knees that have passed their ′use-by-date′ and increase reliance on doctors to repair joint damage. Consistent with recommendations in clinical practice guidelines, a participatory discourse may provide an alternative way of communicating, which may encourage people with knee osteoarthritis to continue to engage in physical activity by focusing on what they can do, rather than what they cannot do.

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Aerts ◽  
D. Le Goff ◽  
M. Odorico ◽  
J. Y. Le Reste ◽  
P. Van Bogaert ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cardiovascular diseases are the world’s leading cause of morbidity and mortality. An active lifestyle is one of the cornerstones in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. An initial step in guiding primary prevention programs is to refer to clinical guidelines. We aimed to systematically review clinical practice guidelines on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and their recommendations regarding physical activity. Methods We systematically searched Trip Medical Database, PubMed and Guidelines International Network from January 2012 up to December 2020 using the following search strings: ‘cardiovascular disease’, ‘prevention’, combined with specific cardiovascular disease risk factors. The identified records were screened for relevance and content. We methodologically assessed the selected guidelines using the AGREE II tool. Recommendations were summarized using a consensus-developed extraction form. Results After screening, 27 clinical practice guidelines were included, all of which were developed in Western countries and showed consistent rigor of development. Guidelines were consistent about the benefit of regular, moderate-intensity, aerobic physical activity. However, recommendations on strategies to achieve and sustain behavior change varied. Multicomponent interventions, comprising education, counseling and self-management support, are recommended to be delivered by various providers in primary health care or community settings. Guidelines advise to embed patient-centered care and behavioral change techniques in prevention programs. Conclusions Current clinical practice guidelines recommend similar PA lifestyle advice and propose various delivery models to be considered in the design of such interventions. Guidelines identify a gap in evidence on the implementation of these recommendations into practice.


2009 ◽  
Vol 76 (6) ◽  
pp. 629-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johann Beaudreuil ◽  
Samy Bendaya ◽  
Marc Faucher ◽  
Emmanuel Coudeyre ◽  
Patricia Ribinik ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
PALANISAMY AMIRTHALINGAM

Objectives: Obesity causes morbidity and mortality and also impairs the quality of life in humans. Clinical practice guidelines are well established to treat the obese population with or without comorbidities in all the age groups. Obesity in adults is a risk factor for metabolic disorders including Type-2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, etc. Hence, this review has compared the various international clinical practice guidelines for the management of obesity in adults. Methods: Four articles were included in the qualitative synthesis after the systematic review of the literature obtained from PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Sciences. Diagnosis and various interventions including lifestyle, pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery are compared for the management of obesity in adults. Results: The diagnosis is crucial since the criteria to determine overweight/obesity is still under debate due to inconclusive evidence. Various interventions including diet, exercise, behavior, drug therapy, and surgery are being recommended currently for the management of obesity. However, ethnicity and culture play a major role in diagnosis and also interventions. Moreover, personalizing the interventions according to the subject will make sense and offers success in the management of obesity. Conclusion: Diagnosis and the intervention should be subject oriented based on ethnicity, culture and patient characteristics. In this connection, many longitudinal studies warranted to specify the diagnostic and management criteria for adults among the various ethnic populations across the world.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document