ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2026
A mixed-methods first-year evaluation of implementation outcomes for a bottom-up osteoarthritis management program across healthcare settings in Ireland.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Good Life with osteoArthritis Denmark (GLA:D®) non-profit initiative is a bottom-up approach to deliver evidence-based care, including exercise and education, to people with hip or knee osteoarthritis. GLA:D® was adapted for public and private healthcare in Ireland, using a participatory approach to co-design implementation strategies that would ensure optimal and equitable access. PURPOSE: To evaluate implementation outcomes of acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration and sustainability of GLA:D® Ireland across healthcare settings, in the first year.
methodsMixed methods explanatory sequential design. GLA:D® training was advertised to physiotherapists in different healthcare settings around Ireland. Quantitative implementation outcomes were collected from the GLA:D® Ireland Registry. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with trained physiotherapists and participants and analyzed to identify themes.
resultsIn the first year, 32% of the 71 physiotherapists trained implemented GLA:D® in practice (n = 10 primary care, n = 2 public hospital, n = 3 private). Of 146 participants, 41% were from three sites with ≥1 physiotherapist trained. In interviews (10 physiotherapists, 9 participants), satisfaction with the structured nature that allowed individualization and self-management was reported. Physiotherapists used the program to tackle long waitlists and participants regained confidence to exercise. While equipment costs were low, more staffing and space were mediators for feasibility and sustainability across settings.
conclusionsWhile a high proportion of GLA:D® adopters were in primary care settings, penetration was more successful in public hospitals, with more resources and physiotherapists trained per site. Results suggest that implementation strategies could be adapted to incentivize training of multiple staff at one site and training of support staff. Top-down funding would help to ensure timely and equitable access to the program across healthcare settings.
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.