Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32930659›Full record

Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2020

Occupational advice to help people return to work following lower limb arthroplasty: the OPAL intervention mapping study.

Paul Baker, Carol Coole, Avril Drummond, Sayeed Khan, Catriona McDaid, Catherine Hewitt, Lucksy Kottam, Sarah Ronaldson, Elizabeth Coleman, David A McDonald and 7 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Paul BakerSouth Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8529-2417
Carol CooleSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4147-5398
Avril DrummondSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1220-8354
Sayeed KhanMake UK, The Manufacturers' Organisation, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9388-7063
Catriona McDaidYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3751-7260
Catherine HewittYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0415-3536
Lucksy KottamSouth Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7976-2416
Sarah RonaldsonYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8321-786X
Elizabeth ColemanYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4210-1865
David A McDonaldWhole System Patient Flow Programme, Scottish Government, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9805-7720
Fiona NouriSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4151-1512
Melanie NarayanasamySchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3483-0777
Iain McNamaraNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2051-8451
Judith FitchBritish Orthopaedic Association Patient Liaison Group, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6687-5200
Louise ThomsonSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1736-7506
Gerry RichardsonCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2360-4566
Amar RanganSouth Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5452-8578
University of Nottingham · GBUniversity of York · GBSouth Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBGlasgow Caledonian University · GBNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital · GBNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBRoyal College of Surgeons of England · GB

Funding

Department of Health 15/28/02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHip and knee replacements are regularly carried out for patients who work. There is little evidence about these patients' needs and the factors influencing their return to work. There is a paucity of guidance to help patients return to work after surgery and a need for structured occupational advice to enable them to return to work safely and effectively.

objectivesTo develop an occupational advice intervention to support early recovery to usual activities including work that is tailored to the requirements of patients undergoing hip or knee replacements. To test the acceptability, practicality and feasibility of this intervention within current care frameworks.

designAn intervention mapping approach was used to develop the intervention. The research methods employed were rapid evidence synthesis, qualitative interviews with patients and stakeholders, a prospective cohort study, a survey of clinical practice and a modified Delphi consensus process. The developed intervention was implemented and assessed during the final feasibility stage of the intervention mapping process.

settingOrthopaedic departments in NHS secondary care.

participantsPatients who were in work and intending to return to work following primary elective hip or knee replacement surgery, health-care professionals and employers.

interventionsOccupational advice intervention.

main outcome measuresDevelopment of an occupational advice intervention, fidelity of the developed intervention when delivered in a clinical setting, patient and clinician perspectives of the intervention and preliminary assessments of intervention effectiveness and cost.

resultsA cohort study (154 patients), 110 stakeholder interviews, a survey of practice (152 respondents) and evidence synthesis provided the necessary information to develop the intervention. The intervention included information resources, a personalised return-to-work plan and co-ordination from the health-care team to support the delivery of 13 patient and 20 staff performance objectives. To support delivery, a range of tools (e.g. occupational checklists, patient workbooks and employer information), roles (e.g. return-to-work co-ordinator) and training resources were created. Feasibility was assessed for 21 of the 26 patients recruited from three NHS trusts. Adherence to the defined performance objectives was 75% for patient performance objectives and 74% for staff performance objectives. The intervention was generally well received, although the short time frame available for implementation and concurrent research evaluation led to some confusion among patients and those delivering the intervention regarding its purpose and the roles and responsibilities of key staff. LIMITATIONS: Implementation and uptake of the intervention was not standardised and was limited by the study time frame. Evaluation of the intervention involved a small number of patients, which limited the ability to assess it.

conclusionsThe developed occupational advice intervention supports best practice. Evaluation demonstrated good rates of adherence against defined performance objectives. However, a number of operational and implementation issues require further attention. FUTURE WORK: The intervention warrants a randomised controlled trial to assess its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to improve rates and timing of sustained return to work after surgery. This research should include the development of a robust implementation strategy to ensure that adoption is sustained. STUDY REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN27426982 and PROSPERO CRD42016045235.

fundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in

Indexed as

ArthroplastyCounselingAgedFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicLower ExtremityMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesQualitative ResearchReturn to WorkSurveys and QuestionnairesCOHORT STUDYEMPLOYMENTFEASIBILITYHIP REPLACEMENTINTERVENTION MAPPINGKNEE REPLACEMENTOCCUPATIONAL ADVICEQUALITATIVERETURN TO WORKSYSTEMATIC REVIEWVOCATIONAL REHABILITATIONWORK

Identifiers

PMID32930659
PMCPMC7520717
OpenAlexW3087237778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.