DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL were systematically searched (1990-April 2020) for studies describing the prevalence of NP and PS in knee and hip osteoarthritis using self-report questionnaires. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Statistical heterogeneity between studies and sub-groups (affected joint and population source as a proxy for disease severity) was assessed (I2 statistic and the Chi-squared test).
RESULTS: From 2,706 non-duplicated references, 39 studies were included (2011-2020). Thirty-six studies reported on knee pain and six on hip pain. For knee osteoarthritis, the pooled prevalence of NP was: using PainDETECT, possible NP(score ≥13) 40% (95%CI 32-48%); probable NP(score >18) 20% (95%CI 15-24%); using Self-Report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs, 32% (95%CI 26-38%); using Douleur Neuropathique (DN4) 41% (95% CI 24-59%). The prevalence of PS using Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) was 36% (95% CI 12-59%). For hip osteoarthritis, the pooled prevalence of NP was: using PainDETECT, possible NP 29% (95%CI 22-37%%); probable NP 9% (95%CI 6-13%); using DN4 22% (95%CI 12-31%) in one study. The prevalence of possible NP pain was higher at the knee (40%) than the hip (29%) (difference 11% (95% CI 0-22%), P = 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Using self-report questionnaire tools, NP was more prevalent in knee than hip osteoarthritis. The prevalence of NP in knee and hip osteoarthritis were similar for each joint regardless of study population source or tool used. Whether defining NP using self-report questionnaires enables more effective targeted therapy in osteoarthritis requires investigation.
METHODOLOGY: This was a cross-sectional study, conducted among patients aged ≥ 18 years with cardiovascular risk factors attending a university primary care clinic. Patients were given the app to use for at least three months. Those who fulfilled the eligibility criteria were recruited. Data gathered were on sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, self-management support by doctors, utilisation of the app at home and social support in using the app. The previously translated and validated Malay version of the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire was used to measure usability. The mean usability score was calculated and linear regressions analysis was conducted to determine the factors associated with the usability of the app.
RESULTS: A total of 247 patients with at least one cardiovascular risk factor(s) were recruited. The mean age was 60.2 (±8.2). The majority were Malays (86.2%) and half of them were males (52.2%). The total mean (±SD) usability score was 5.26 (±0.67) indicating a high usability of the app. Usability of the app declined with increasing age in the simple linear regressions analysis. The multiple linear regressions yielded that being Malay (b = 0.31, 95% CI 0.08,0.54), using the app at home to understand their medications (b = 0.33, 95% CI 0.12,0.53) and having social support from family members and friends (b = 0.28, 95% CI 0.07,0.49) were significantly associated with higher usability of the app.
CONCLUSION: The usability of the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN Self-Management Mobile App© was high among patients with cardiovascular risk factors in our primary care clinic. This finding supports the widespread use of this app among our patients. Involvement of family members and friends should be encouraged to improve the usability of the app.