Professional views on patient education in osteoporosis
- 109 Downloads
The aim of this study was to investigate patient education in osteoporosis, with a consensus-building Delphi survey. The results showed that the purposes of osteoporosis schools are to reduce the risk of falling, facilitate empowerment, increase levels of function and activity and teach participants to master or reduce pain.
According to the World Health Organization, osteoporosis is a major health problem. The morbidity is caused by fractures associated with pain and decreased physical function, social function and well-being. The aim of this study was to investigate and reach consensus about how so-called osteoporosis schools are run by professionals in Sweden with a focus on intervention and evaluation.
The study design was a consensus-building, three-round Delphi survey. Questionnaires were sent by web and post to an expert panel comprising 15 nurses, occupational therapists and physiotherapists. In round 1, they were asked to write descriptions within the frame of eight domains related to intervention and evaluation. In the second and third rounds, the Delphi panel was asked to mark on a Likert scale the importance of 40 statements within these domains.
The answers showed that the purposes of osteoporosis schools are to reduce the risk of falling, facilitate empowerment, increase levels of function and activity and teach participants to master or reduce pain. The schools comprise theoretical elements as well as practical exercises. Patients with fractures related to osteoporosis are offered participation. There is a lack of a theoretical basis, as well as of evidence, for present treatment models. Evaluation ought to be done systematically, and for this purpose, different questionnaires are used. Experts assert that evaluations show that patients gain increased activity levels, function, knowledge about osteoporosis, empowerment and pain reduction.
Consensus was reached in 29 of 40 items.
KeywordsCross-professional Delphi technique Fractures Patient education
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest in this original article.
- 1.WHO (1994) Technical report series. Assessment of Fracture Risk and its Application to Screening for Post-Menopausal Osteoporosis No 843. World Health Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- 3.Pedretti LW, Schultz Krohn W (2006) Pedretti’s occupational therapy: practice skills for physical dysfunction. Mosby Elsevier, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
- 4.SBU (2003) Osteoporos prevention, diagnostik och behandling [osteoporosis: prevention, diagnostics and treatment]. Statens beredning för medicinsk utvärdering, StockholmGoogle Scholar
- 5.Swedenmyr F, Lindström I (2006) Regionalt vårdprogram för osteoporos [Regional Care Plan for Osteoporosis]. Centrum för hälso- och sjukvårdsanalys, rapport nr 20. Västra GötalandsregionenGoogle Scholar
- 6.Ekström H (2009) The influence of fracture on activity, social participation & quality of life among older adults. Results from the population study Good Ageing in Skåne. Dissertation, Lund UniversityGoogle Scholar
- 10.ICF (2003) International classification of functioning, disability and health. Socialstyrelsen [The National Board of Health and Welfare], StockholmGoogle Scholar
- 11.Fisher AG (2009) Occupational therapy intervention process model—a model for planning and implementing top-down, client-centred, and occupation-based interventions. Three Star, Fort CollinsGoogle Scholar
- 13.SBU (2009) Nationella riktlinjer för diabetes, preliminär version [National guidelines for diabetes, preliminary version] Statens beredning för medicinsk utvärdering, Stockholm http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/AZ/Sakomraden/Nationella_riktlinjer
- 14.Schousboe JT, De Bold RC, Kuno LS, Weiss TW, Chen YT, Abbott TA (2005) Education and phone follow-up in postmenopausal women at risk for osteoporosis. In: Dis Manage Health Outcomes. Available at Adis Data Information BV 13:395-404 <http://diseasemanagement.adisonline.com/pt/re/dmo/abstract>
- 15.Wilcock A (2006) An occupational perspective of health. NJ Slack, ThorofareGoogle Scholar
- 17.Information från Läkemedelsverket 2 (2004) Behandling av osteoporos för att förebygga frakturer [Treating osteoporosis to prevent fractures]. Läkemedelsverket, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
- 20.Vasquez-Ramos R, Leahy M, Hernandez NE (2007) The Delphi method in rehabilitation counselling research. Rehabil Couns Bull 50(111–118):121–124Google Scholar
- 26.DePoy E, Gitlin LN (1999) Forskning: en introduktion [research: an introduction]. Studentlitteratur, LundGoogle Scholar
- 27.Mary E, Hurley R (1986) Nursing diagnosis: validation. The sixth conference. CV Mosby, St Louis, pp 183–190Google Scholar
- 30.Sumsion T (1998) The Delphi technique: an adaptive research tool. Br J Occup Ther 61:153–156Google Scholar
- 31.Vetenskapsrådet och CODEX (2008) Centrum för forsknings- och bioetik. http://www.codex.vr.se/forskninghumsam.shtml
- 32.Adler M, Ziglio E (1996) Gazing into the oracle—the Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. Cromwell, MelkshamGoogle Scholar
- 39.Linstone HA, Turoff M (1975) The Delphi method—techniques and applications. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar