Trial reportAtencion primaria2012
Can an intervention on clinical inertia have an impact on the perception of pain, functionality and quality of life in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis? Results from a cluster randomised trial.
Trial report in Atencion primaria, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with clinical inertia: an integrative review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2014Review
- Clinical inertia in osteoarthritis.Atencion primaria · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEvaluate whether an intervention applied to general practitioners to prevent clinical inertia had an impact on pain, functionality, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis.
designThis was a cluster-based, multicentre, prospective, randomized, parallel-group study. Clusters of physicians working were assigned to one of two study groups. Physicians in Group 1 received a training session while those in Group 2 did not.
settingPrimary Care Health centers representative of the entire Spanish territory.
participants329 general practitioners of primary healthcare centre.
interventionsThe intervention consists of a motivational session to propose a proactive care, based on current recommendations. MEASUREMENTS: Visual analogue scale (VAS); functionality (WOMAC scale) and global perception of health by SF-12. Effects were measured in two visits six months apart.
resultsA total of 1361 physicians, and 4076 patients participated in the study. No significant differences were observed in the clinical benefit obtained between patients assigned to Group 1 and Group 2. Nevertheless, a significant improvement was observed in the combined population (Groups 1 + 2) in the VAS (p<0.001), WOMAC (p<0.0001) and SF-12v2 (p<0.001) questionnaires in Visit 2 compared to Visit 1.
conclusionsThe results indicate that, although this specific intervention carried out on physicians did not provide an additional clinical benefit to patients with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis, an increased awareness of the patient's disease through the use of functionality indexes, as well as the mere fact of being observed, seem to improve patient-reported pain, functionality and HRQoL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.