The purpose of the 2007 Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice survey was to describe practice styles, instrument usage, and perceptions of responder criteria and state-attainment criteria in osteoarthritis (OA) management in routine clinical rheumatology practice.
A 16-item questionnaire (65 subcomponents) was developed, pretested, revised, formatted, and mailed to rheumatologists residing in Australia. Responses were obtained from 136 rheumatologists (response rate 58%).
Approximately half the Australian respondents did not follow up their patients with hip and knee OA and two-thirds did not follow up their patients with hand OA. Health status measures (HSM) were infrequently used, even by those respondents who followed their patients with OA longitudinally, and the scores from those HSM that were used, were rarely if ever formally recorded. Respondents rated the following 6 requirements of a measure for use in clinical practice as very important: validity, reliability, responsiveness, simplicity, quick completion, and easy scoring. One-fifth to one-quarter of respondents indicated they did not know quantitatively what constituted a clinically important improvement, or a health state acceptable to patients with OA. The majority of the remainder selected values not closely aligned with published values in the peer review literature.
While simply describing the health status of the patient is interesting, the more strategic applications are in benchmarking, and using the data to inform shared decision-making and therapeutic goal-setting. The OMIRROP survey suggests that further investigation of interpretation issues are essential, before evaluating the role of quantitative measurement in routine OA clinical practice.