ArticleDer Orthopade2008
[The management of osteoarthritis by general practitioners in Germany: comparison of self-reported behaviour with international guidelines].
Article in Der Orthopade, 2008. 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.
- [painApp-mobile pain monitoring in the home care setting].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn most countries, guidelines for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) are available. However, in Germany, no guideline for the primary care sector is available. The care provider of most patients is the general practitioner (GP). The aim of the study was to investigate the approaches in diagnosing and treating OA of German GPs and to assess adherence to international guidelines.
methodsCross-sectional study using a structured questionnaire with a random sample of 144 GPs.
resultsRegarding diagnosis, the importance of X-rays was overestimated. Regarding treatment approaches, exercising and weight reduction were regarded as primary treatment targets. Pharmacological treatment approaches were somewhat guideline oriented, but conservative approaches such as physical therapy were overestimated as invasive treatments such as intra-articular injections were underestimated in its benefit.
conclusionEstablishing a guideline specifically for primary care and increasing guideline adherence could help to prevent the present overuse of X-rays and the high amount of referrals to orthopaedics, save costs and reduce inadequate treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18064437What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.