ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 3017

Program Evaluation of ‘the Joint Clinic’: An Innovative Clinical Service for Patients with Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis

J. Haxby Abbott1, Helen Harcombe2, Chris Crane3, Liam Hutton3, Kirsten Stout3, Cathy Chapple4 and David Gwynne-Jones5, 1Centre for Musculoskeletal Outcomes Research, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, 2Centre for Musculoskeletal Outcomes Research, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, 3Dunedin Hospital, Southern District Health Board, Dunedin, New Zealand, 4School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand, 5Orthopaedic Surgery, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

Meeting: 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Osteoarthritis and quality improvement

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Title: Innovations in Rheumatologic Care

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ARHP)

Background/Purpose: In socialized healthcare systems with free public access to healthcare, there are circumstances wherein patients referred by general medical practitioners (GPs) for specialist physician consultation may not be not offered a first specialist appointment (FSA), when demand exceeds supply. Thus, clinical prioritization is necessary. To address unmet need for FSA in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis, we initiated and evaluated a physical therapist-led clinic offering non-surgical management of osteoarthritis and outpatient treatment.

Methods: We conducted a program evaluation comprising: a proof-of-concept evaluation, an implementation evaluation, a process evaluation, and an outcomes evaluation. Mixed-methods qualitative and quantitative methodology grounded in health services research were used. Patients, GPs, surgeons, and hospital clinical, management and administrative staff were interviewed and/or surveyed. Patient trajectories were analysed and patient-reported outcome measures were assessed.

Results: The concept model was supported by best-practice literature, and was implemented in close concordance with the model proposed. Qualitative interviews and survey data indicate the “Joint Clinic” has been well accepted by key stakeholders and end-users, is functioning well within the host organisation, is accessible and operating at close to intended capacity. In the 2-year evaluation period, the clinic served 358 new patients [53% female, mean(sd) age 66(10), BMI 29.9(7.5)] in 637 consultations. Unmet need was reduced by 80% compared with pre-implementation for hip/knee OA patients; 30% overall. 31% of patients experienced clinically significant (>20%) improvement on patient-reported outcome measures. 25% of patients were referred for FSA (mean wait 77 days) for fast-track access to joint replacement surgery. 70% of patients were satisfied to be seen by the “Joint Clinic” instead of an orthopaedic surgeon; 98% were satisfied with the knowledge and expertise of the “Joint Clinic” staff; 80% would recommend the clinic to others. Cost-per-patient was NZ$384 (year 2). The host organisation has accepted the service as value-for-money and sustainable.

Conclusion: These data indicate successful implementation and functioning of an innovative service. The service is achieving satisfactory outcomes benefiting patients through clinically significant improvement, monitoring on optimal non-surgical management, or fast-tracked referral for joint replacement surgery.


Disclosure:

J. H. Abbott,
None;

H. Harcombe,
None;

C. Crane,
None;

L. Hutton,
None;

K. Stout,
None;

C. Chapple,
None;

D. Gwynne-Jones,
None.

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/program-evaluation-of-the-joint-clinic-an-innovative-clinical-service-for-patients-with-hip-or-knee-osteoarthritis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology