Brittle bones, pain and fractures – Lay constructions of osteoporosis among Norwegian women attending the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT)

Skolbekken, John-Arne; Østerlie, Wenche; Forsmo, Siri

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.02.022

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may be assumed that medical practitioners share a single definition of osteoporosisby virtue of their training and expectations that they maintain knowledge of current researchbut this is not necessarily the case. Over the past two centuries there has been a shift in the medical understanding of osteoporosis, from its 19th-century portrayal of a deteriorated, porous human bone and a focus in the 20th century on prevalence of fracture due to hormonal changes in menopausal women, to the present characterisation of osteoporosis as a disease to be treated or cured and/or as a manageable risk factor for fracture [10][11][12]. Attempts to define osteoporosis in terms of a threshold value for bone mineral density (BMD) have contributed towards this ambiguity.…”

Section: Defining Osteoporosismentioning

confidence: 99%

General medical practitioners' knowledge and beliefs about osteoporosis and its investigation and management

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose We aimed to investigate barriers, enablers and other factors influencing the investigation and management of osteoporosis, using a qualitative approach. This paper analyses data from discussions with general medical practitioners (GPs) about their beliefs and attitudes regarding osteoporosis and its management. Methods Fourteen GPs and two practice nurses aged 27-89 years participated in four focus groups, from June 2010 to March 2011. Each group comprised 3-5 participants, and discussions were semi-structured, according to the protocol developed for the main study. Discussion points ranged from the circumstances under which GPs would initiate investigation for osteoporosis and their subsequent actions, to their views about treatment efficacy and patient adherence to prescribed treatment. Audio recordings were transcribed and coded for analysis, using analytic comparison to identify the major themes. Results The GPs were not particularly concerned about osteoporosis in their patients or the general population, ranking diabetes, osteoarthritis, cardiovascular disease and hypertension higher than concern about osteoporosis. They expressed confidence in the efficacy of antifracture medications, but were concerned about the potential financial burden on patients with limited incomes. The GPs were unsure about guidelines for investigation and management of osteoporosis in men, and the appropriate duration of treatment, particularly for the bisphosphonates in all patients. Conclusions The GPs' ambivalence about osteoporosis appeared to stem from structural factors such as financial barriers for patients and their own beliefs about the salience of osteoporosis. GPs considered the impact of investigating and prescribing treatment in the context of patients' whole lives.

show abstract

Section: Defining Osteoporosismentioning

confidence: 99%

General medical practitioners' knowledge and beliefs about osteoporosis and its investigation and management

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One hundred sixteen findings were abstracted from the included studies and grouped into subthemes. The subthemes were classified into four major themes: inadequate knowledge (i.e., definition and disease course [8-11, 13, 15, 23, 29, 31], risk factors and prevention [9,11,13,20,21,26,27], diagnosis and treatment [11,16,17,26,27,29] [9,10,14,20,24,27], implications of diagnosis [17,19,22,25,27], medications [10,11,16,17,25]), and lack of information from health care providers [9,10,14,20,28,29]. Inadequate knowledge.…”

Section: Synthesis Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge, beliefs, and concerns about bone health from a systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients with low bone density or osteoporosis need information for effective prevention or disease management, respectively. However, patients may not be getting enough information from their primary care providers or other sources. Inadequate disease information leaves patients ill-informed and creates misconceptions and unnecessary concerns about the disease. Objective We systematically reviewed and synthesized the available literature to determine patient knowledge, beliefs, and concerns about osteoporosis and identify potential gaps in knowledge. Methods A systematic search was conducted for full-text qualitative studies addressing understanding, literacy, and/or perceptions about osteoporosis and its management, using Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ERIC, PsychINFO, Psyc Behav Sci Collec, and PubMed, from inception through September 2016. Studies were selected by two reviewers, assessed for quality, and themes extracted using the Joanna Briggs Institute data extraction tool. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes and subthemes. Results Twenty-five studies with a total of 757 participants (including 105 men) were selected for analysis out of 1031 unique citations. Selected studies were from Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Four main themes emerged: inadequate knowledge, beliefs and misconceptions, concerns about osteoporosis, and lack of information from health care providers. Participants had inadequate knowledge about

show abstract

“…"Ordinary" people's interest in "what kind of person" gets, for example, heart trouble, brittle bones, or diabetes, is evident in studies on lay beliefs of various illnesses (e.g., Skolbekken, Østerlie, & Forsmo, 2008). Quite often such ideas are rather well-informed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Categories by Heart: Shortcut Reasoning in a Cardiology Clinic

Jacobsson

2014

P&P

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the practice of doctors and nurses to invoke the categories of age, sex, class, ethnicity, and/or lifestyle factors when discussing individual patients and patient groups. In what situations are such references explicitly made, and what does this practice accomplish? The material consists of field notes from a cardiology clinic in Sweden, and a theory of descriptive practice guided the analysis. When professionals describe patients, discuss decisions, or explain why a patient is ill, age, sex, class, ethnicity, and/or lifestyle serve as contextualization cues, often including widespread results from epidemiological research about groups of patients at higher or lower risk for cardiac disease. These categories work as shortcut reasoning to nudge interpretations in a certain direction, legitimize decisions, and strengthen arguments. In general, studying the descriptions of patients/clients/students provides an entrance to professional methods of reasoning, including their implicit moral assumptions.

show abstract

Brittle bones, pain and fractures – Lay constructions of osteoporosis among Norwegian women attending the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT)

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

General medical practitioners' knowledge and beliefs about osteoporosis and its investigation and management

General medical practitioners' knowledge and beliefs about osteoporosis and its investigation and management

Knowledge, beliefs, and concerns about bone health from a systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies

Categories by Heart: Shortcut Reasoning in a Cardiology Clinic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About