Recommendations to Strengthen Collaboration in Treating Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Delphi Study

Why It Matters

Enhanced interdisciplinary coordination can streamline OA treatment pathways, reduce unnecessary surgeries, and improve outcomes, addressing a major inefficiency in musculoskeletal care.

Key Takeaways

• Digital communication tools top priority to boost OA care coordination.
• Cross‑discipline education improves understanding of each provider’s treatment options.
• Joint‑replacement criteria awareness reduces unnecessary surgeries.
• Collaboration gaps stem from limited communication and unclear role expectations.
• Delphi panel achieved consensus with 14 actionable recommendations.

Pulse Analysis

Osteoarthritis of the knee and hip remains a leading cause of disability, costing health systems billions annually. While pharmacologic and surgical options dominate headlines, the bulk of patient management relies on coordinated conservative care—physical therapy, lifestyle counseling, and timely referrals. The Delphi study’s systematic approach, engaging 54 clinicians across primary care, surgery, and rehabilitation, underscores a growing recognition that fragmented provider interactions erode treatment efficacy. By quantifying satisfaction at a modest 6.0 out of 10, the research spotlights a systemic shortfall that mirrors broader challenges in chronic disease management.

The study’s three highest‑ranked recommendations converge on three themes: technology, education, and clinical criteria. Digital communication platforms—secure messaging, shared care plans, and interoperable electronic health records—promise real‑time information exchange, reducing delays and duplicative assessments. Simultaneously, cross‑disciplinary education equips each professional with a clear view of alternative treatment modalities, fostering mutual respect and smoother referral pathways. Finally, standardizing joint‑replacement criteria equips clinicians to identify patients who truly need surgery, curbing overuse and aligning expectations. Early adopters of these strategies report shorter wait times, higher patient satisfaction, and lower overall costs, suggesting a scalable model for broader health‑system integration.

For policymakers and health‑system leaders, the findings provide a concrete agenda: invest in interoperable digital tools, fund interdisciplinary training programs, and develop consensus guidelines for surgical eligibility. Such initiatives can transform OA care from a siloed, reactive process into a proactive, collaborative continuum. Future research should measure the real‑world impact of these recommendations on clinical outcomes, cost savings, and provider burnout, ensuring that the proposed collaboration framework translates into measurable improvements for patients living with osteoarthritis.