Comparison of Face-to-Face vs Digital Delivery of an Osteoarthritis Treatment Program for Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis

IMPORTANCE: Digital care platforms have been introduced, but there is limited evidence for their efficacy compared with traditional face-to-face treatment modalities. OBJECTIVE: To compare mean pain reduction among individuals with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee or hip who underwent face-to-face vs digital first-line intervention. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This registry-based cohort study included all persons with knee or hip osteoarthritis who participated in structured first-line treatment for osteoarthritis in a primary care setting in Sweden. Inclusion criteria were as follows: the treatment was delivered face-to-face or digitally between April 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019; patients provided 3-month follow-up data for pain; and patients had program adherence of at least 80%. Data analysis was conducted in March 2021. EXPOSURES: Participants completed a 3-month intervention, including education and exercise for hip or knee osteoarthritis, with program adherence of 80% or higher, delivered face-to-face or by a digital application. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Difference in change in joint pain (11-point numeric rating scale, with 0 indicating no pain and 10, the worst possible pain) between baseline and 3-month follow-up between the 2 intervention modalities. A minimal clinically important difference in pain change between groups was predefined as 1 point. Secondary outcomes were walking difficulties, health-related quality of life, willingness to undergo joint surgery, and fear avoidance behavior. RESULTS: A total of 6946 participants (mean [SD] age, 67 [9] years; 4952 [71%] women; 4424 [64%] knee OA; 2504 [36%] hip OA) were included, with 4237 (61%) receiving face-to-face treatment and 2709 (39%) receiving digital treatment. Both the face-to-face (mean change, −1.10 [95% CI −1.17 to −1.02] points) and digital interventions (mean change, −1.87 [95% CI, −1.94 to −1.79] points) resulted in a clinically important pain reduction at 3 months. Participants in the digitally delivered intervention experienced a larger estimated improvement at 3 months (adjusted mean difference, −0.93 [95% CI, −1.04 to −0.81] points). Results of secondary outcomes were broadly consistent with main outcome. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This Swedish national registry-based cohort study showed that people with knee or hip OA participating in first-line intervention experienced clinically relevant improvements in pain, whether delivered face-to-face or digitally. The increased benefit of digital delivery compared with face-to-face delivery was of uncertain clinical importance.