Affiliation:
1. School of Rehabilitation Science McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada
2. School of Nursing McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada
3. School of Kinesiology and Health Sciences York University Toronto Ontario Canada
Abstract
AbstractIntroductionOsteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions in Canada. Despite the established benefits of non‐pharmacological management (education, exercise) for people with OA, many do not receive treatment, resulting in pain, decreased physical function, and poorer quality of life. Virtual programme options grew significantly during the recent pandemic and may provide longer‐term opportunities for increased uptake by reaching individuals otherwise unable to participate. This study explored the experiences and perspectives of clients participating in and clinicians providing the Good Life with osteoArthritis: Denmark (GLA:DTM) Canada remote programme.MethodsThis qualitative descriptive study recruited 10 clients with hip and/or knee OA and 11 clinicians across Canada using purposive sampling. An online pre‐interview survey was completed, and individual interviews were conducted, audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed independently by two researchers using inductive thematic analysis. Coding and analyses were initially conducted separately by group and then compared and combined.ResultsFour overarching themes (and 11 subthemes) were identified: (1) Expected and unexpected benefits of virtual programs; (2) Drawbacks to virtual programs; (3) Programme delivery in a virtual world; (4) Shifting and non‐shifting perspectives. Although initially sceptical, after completion of the programme, clients were in favour of virtual delivery with many benefits described. Clinicians' perspectives varied about feedback aimed to correct client movement patterns.ConclusionsClients and clinicians identified important experiential and procedural elements for virtual chronic disease management programs that include education and exercise. Additional work is needed to understand if the GLA:DTM remote outcomes are equivalent to the in‐person programme.