Epidemiological trends of osteoarthritis at the global, regional, and national levels from 1990 to 2021, with a projection from 2021 to 2050 ============================================================================================================================================ * Lichun Qiao * Miaoqian Li * Feidan Deng * Xinyue Wen * Jun Wang * Huan Deng * Zhaowei Xue * Ping Wan * Rongqi Xiang * Yanjun Xie * Huifang He * Xiangyu Fan * Yufei Song * Jing Han ## Abstract **Objectives** Osteoarthritis (OA) and has become a global public health problem. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the burden of OA across different geographic regions, ages, sexes, and types. **Methods** Publicly available data from the Global Burden of Disease 2021 were used in this study. The burden of OA was estimated at the global, SDI quintile, regional, and national levels from 1990 to 2021 through systematic analyses. Bayesian age-period-cohort models were utilized to predict the burden over the next 30 years. **Results** Globally, there were 607 million people suffering from OA with 46.6 million new cases and 21.3 million DALYs in 2021. The age-standardized incidence, prevalence and DALYs rates increased to 535.00, 6967.29, and 244.50 per 100,000 population, with knee OA accounting for more than 56%. The age-standardized rates of OA were higher in females than in males. East Asia, South Asia, and Western Europe were the top three regions and China, India, and the United States were the top three countries with the highest burdens. In addition, high body-mass index (BMI) resulted in 4.43 million DALYs with an increase of 205.10%. BAPC projections showed that the burden of OA will continue to rise over the next 30 years. **Conclusions** As populations ageing and global obesity rates rise, the burden of total OA and OA due to high BMI will continue to increase. Females and middle-aged and elderly patients are the current populations to focus on. The development and implementation of effective prevention and treatment strategies is critical. Keywords * Osteoarthritis * High body-mass index * Disease burden * GBD 2021 * Disability-adjusted life years ## 1 Introduction Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide, characterized by cartilage degeneration, changes in subchondral bone, synovial inflammation, and joint inflammation, resulting in symptoms such as pain, stiffness, disability, and function impairment [1–4]. The knees, hips, hands, feet, and spine are usually the typical sites of OA, with a high prevalence of polyarticular involvement [4, 5]. OA is a significant contributor to disability and impaired quality of life in the elderly population, sometimes necessitating joint replacement surgery in advanced stages. One study reported a prevalence of 595 million individuals affected by OA globally in 2020, accounting for 7.6% of the total population, with OA being identified as the seventh leading cause of years lived with disability for those aged 70 years and older [6]. The epidemiological patterns of OA have been the subject of extensive research in recent decades, with increasing attention directed towards comprehending its worldwide burden and implications for public health. Risk factors for OA primarily encompass human factors such as age, gender, obesity, genetics, and diet, as well as joint-level factors such as injury, misalignment, and abnormal loading, which interact with each other in a complex manner to influence the development of OA [7]. Among these factors, age, gender, and obesity are recognized as independent risk factors for OA. The prevalence of overweight obesity has emerged as a significant public health concern on a global scale. According to data from the World Health Organization, the incidence of obesity has more than doubled in adults and tripled in adolescents worldwide since 1990, and by 2022, approximately 2.5 billion adults would be classified as overweight. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study indicated that high body-mass index (BMI) contributed to 20.4% (95% UI −1.7 to 36.6) of OA cases in 2020 [6]. In light of risk factors such as aging populations, sedentary lifestyles, and escalating rates of obesity, the incidence of OA is rapidly increasing [7, 8], not only causing severe disease and economic burden but also putting pressure on healthcare systems [9, 10]. Timely and comprehensive analyses of the current osteoarthritis disease burden and projections of future time trends can facilitate policy decisions. Therefore, this study analyzed the epidemiological trends in OA from 1990 to 2021, outlined the global, regional, and national burden of the disease, and quantified the disease-specific disease burden by factors such as sex, age, site of disease, and high BMI. Meanwhile, trends are projected to change over the next 30 years, with a worrying rise in the disease burden of OA. Understanding the evolving landscape of OA epidemiology can better inform future interventions and initiatives to reduce the burden of joint disease. The projections also highlight the urgent need to prevent and manage OA globally. ## 2 Methods ### 2.1. Study data source The GBD 2021, led by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), provides the most comprehensive and up-to-date data assessment of the descriptive epidemiology of diseases in 21 regions and 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2021. Data for this study were sourced from the Global Health Data Exchange Tool ([http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool](http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool)), including the number and rate of incidence, prevalence, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as well as age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR), age-standardized prevalence rate (ASPR), and age-standardized DALYs rate (ASDR) of OA at the global, socio-demographic index (SDI) quintile, regional, and national levels. The burden data attributable to high BMI were also included. Moreover, countries were divided by SDI into five parts according to total fertility rate, per capita income, and average years of education, including low, low-middle, middle, high-middle, and high) to assess the relationship between OA and social development status. ### 2.2. Definition In the GBD 2021 study, OA of the hip, knee, hand, and other joints was included, and OA affecting the cervical spine, lumbar spine, or both sites were not included in the other OA categories. The GBD defines the reference case for hip and knee OA as symptomatic OA, confirmed by radiographically as the Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2-4 [11, 12]. Grade 2 indicates the presence of a definite osteophyte, grade 3 indicates multiple osteophytes and joint space narrowing, and grade 4 includes bone deformity along with the criteria of grade 3. Symptomatic OA requires reporting pain for at least one month within the past 12 months [6]. The reference case for hand OA is any single hand joint or the presence of several joints presenting with symptoms and radiologically confirmed as OA [6]. In addition, given the lack of survey data, U.S. insurance claims data from 2000 to 2016 constitute the only source of other OA data [6]. High BMI is a GBD risk factor for knee and hip OA, which is defined as BMI greater than or equal to25 kg/m2 among people aged over 20 years, and a BMI of 20-25 kg/m2 is considered to be the theoretical minimum level of risk exposure [6, 13]. Previous studies have described detailed methods for comparative risk assessment for BMI estimation and high BMI [14]. ### 2.3 Statistical Analysis To compare the OA burden in 2021 with that in 1990, changes in incident cases, prevalent cases, and DALYs were calculated. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were calculated to reflect the temporal trends in age-standardized rates (ASRs) of OA over the past 32 years. The ASRs are regarded as increasing if both the EAPC and the lower limit of the 95% uncertain interval (UI) are positive. In contrast, if the EAPC and the upper limit of the 95% UI are negative, the ASRs are considered to be decreasing. Also, the Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the relationship between SDI and ASRs of OA at the global, regional, and national levels. In addition, the Bayesian age-period cohort (BAPC) analysis was used to predict the disease burden of OA from 2021 to 2050. *P-*value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. ## 3 Results ### 3.1 Burden of OA at the global and SDI quintile levels The global burden of OA significantly increased from 1990 to 2021. By 2021, there were approximately 46.6 (95% UI: 41.1-51.6) million incident cases, 607 (95% UI: 538-671) million prevalent cases, and 21.3 (95% UI: 10.2-42.9) million DALYs. Females consistently demonstrated higher incident cases, prevalent cases, DALYs, and ASRs compared to males. The burden pattern was consistent across all age groups. The incident cases, prevalent cases, DALYs, and incidence rate exhibited a pattern of initial increase followed by a decrease with advancing age. In contrast, the rates of prevalence and DALYs demonstrated a consistent upward trend with age (figure 1). The highest burden associated with OA was observed in knee OA in both 1990 and 2021, while the most substantial increase occurred in hand OA (table 1). Over the past 32 years, the ASRs of knee, hand, other, and hip OA have consistently ranked in descending order (figure S1). In 2021, knee OA represented the largest proportion globally, with ASRs exceeding 56%, followed by hand OA with ASRs greater than 22% (figure 2). ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F1) Figure 1. The global disease burden of OA by age and sex in 1990 and 2021. **(A-B)** Incident case and incidence rate. **(C-D)** Prevalent cases and prevalence rate. **(E-F)** DALYs and DALYs rate. Error bars and shadow bands indicate 95% uncertainty intervals. OA: osteoarthritis; DALYs: disability-adjusted life years. ![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F2.medium.gif) [Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F2) Figure 2. The proportion of ASRs (per 100,000 population) of knee, hand, hip, and other OA at the global and regional levels in 1990 and 2021. ASRs: age-standardized rates; OA: osteoarthritis; ASIR: age-standardized incidence rate; ASPR: age-standardized prevalence rate; ASDR: age-standardized disability-adjusted life years rate. View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/T1) Table 1. The incident case, prevalent case, DALYs, and their changes in osteoarthritis from 1990 to 2021 There was an increase in incident cases, prevalent cases, and DALYs of OA across SDI quintiles in 2021, with the most significant rise in the middle SDI quintile (table 1). The middle SDI quintile exhibited the highest burden in 2021, while the high SDI quintile had the highest ASRs, followed by the high-middle, middle, low-middle, and low SDI quintiles (table 1 and table S1). Moreover, the ASRs for both sexes and females in the high and high-middle SDI quintiles exceeded the global average (figure S2). The rankings of ASRs for the four types of OA were consistent with global trends (figure S1). ### 3.2 Burden of OA at the regional level In 2021, there was a varying degree of increase in incident cases, prevalent cases, DALYs, and ASRs of OA across the 21 regions (table 1, table S1 and figure S3). North Africa and Middle East exhibited the highest increase in incident cases, while Central Latin America showed the highest growth in prevalent cases and DALYs. table S2 compares the three regions with the top and bottom burden in 1990 and 2021. East Asia, South Asia, and Western Europe were consistently identified as the top three regions with the greatest burden. The bottom three regions with the lowest burden were the Caribbean and Oceania in 2021. Analysis over 32 years showed a general upward trend in ASRs across most regions (figure S4). Additionally, ASRs were higher among females than males (figure 3). East Asia and high-income North America had the largest and smallest EAPCs for ASRs, respectively (table S1). High-income Asia Pacific, high-income North America, and Australasia ranked among the top three regions with the highest ASRs of OA in 2021, while Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa, Central Sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia ranked among the bottom three regions (table S2). ![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F3) Figure 3. The ASRs (per 100,000 population) of OA by sex at the global and regional levels in 1990 and 2021. **(A)** ASIR, ASPR, and ASDR in 1990. **(B)** ASIR, ASPR, and ASDR in 2021. Error bars indicate 95% uncertainty intervals. ASRs: age-standardized rates; OA: osteoarthritis; ASIR: age-standardized incidence rate; ASPR: age-standardized prevalence rate; ASDR: age-standardized disability-adjusted life years rate. Knee and hand OA dominated the ASRs in most regions, followed by other types of hip OA (figure 2). In most regions, knee OA accounted for over 50%, with East Asia having the highest proportion, where the ASIR, ASPR, and ASDR of knee OA reached 73.3%, 66.0%, and 66.3% in 2021. Furthermore, positive associations were observed at the global and regional levels, indicating that OA burden increases with higher SDI (figure S5-S7). The burden estimates in Western Sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Sub-Saharan Africa, Central Latin America, Tropical Latin America, the Caribbean, Southern Latin America, Eastern Europe, and high-income Asia Pacific exceeded expectations based on SDI from 1990 to 2021. ### 3.3 Burden of OA at the national level The incident cases, prevalent cases, DALYs, and ASRs of OA increased in most 204 countries and territories in 2021 (table S3-S4). China, India, and the United States emerged as the top three nations bearing the highest burdens of OA, and the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Jordan experienced the most significant increase in burden. Conversely, Nauru, Niue, and Tokelau were identified as the bottom three nations with the burdens of OA, and Georgia, Latvia, and Bulgaria showed the lowest increase in incident cases. Georgia, Latvia, and Niue displayed the lowest growth in prevalent cases and DALYs (table S3, S5, figure 4A-4C, figure S8A-S8C, and figure S9). In 2021, the Republic of Korea, Brunei Darussalam, and Singapore exhibited the highest ASRs estimates. In contrast, Viet Nam, Timor-Leste, and Cambodia had the lowest ASIR, while Burundi, Cambodia, and Madagascar had the lowest ASPR, and Cambodia, Madagascar, and Afghanistan had the lowest ASDR (table S5, figure 4D-4F and figure S8D-S8F). The EAPCs of ASRs among 204 countries and territories are illustrated in figure S10. At the national level, a positive association was identified between ASRs and SDI for 204 countries and territories in 2021, indicating an increase in the burden of OA with higher SDI levels (figure S11). Similar positive correlations were also observed across different sexes (figure S12-S13). Notably, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea, Brunei Darussalam, and Singapore exhibited a burden that exceeded expectations, while Viet Nam, Afghanistan, Canada, and Cambodia displayed a burden lower than anticipated. ![Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F4.medium.gif) [Figure 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F4) Figure 4. The incident cases, prevalent cases, DALYs, and ASRs (per 100,000 population) of OA at the national level in 2021. **(A)** Incident case. **(B)** Prevalent case. **(C)** DALYs. **(D)** ASIR. **(E)** ASPR. **(F)** ASDR. OA: osteoarthritis; DALYs: disability-adjusted life years rate; ASRs: age-standardized rates; ASIR: age-standardized incidence rate; ASPR: age-standardized prevalence rate; ASDR: age-standardized disability-adjusted life years rate. ### 3.4 Burden of OA attributable to high BMI at the global and SDI quintile levels Table S6 presents the distribution and variations of DALYs and ASDR of OA attributable to high BMI. Globally, the DALYs were 4.43 (95% UI: −0.42-12.34) million in 2021, representing a 205.10% increase compared to 1990. Over the past 32 years, the ASDR has demonstrated a consistent rise from 35.97 (95% UI: −3.14-102.31) per 100,000 population in 1990 to 50.59 (95% UI: −4.81-141.35) per 100,000 population, with an EAPC of 1.17 (95% UI: 1.15-1.20) (figure 5A and table S6). The ASDR for females in 2021 was approximately 1.54 times higher than that of males. Specifically, the DALYs attributable to knee and hip OA due to high BMI increased globally by 207.64% and 181.92%. The DALYs and ASDR for knee OA were approximately 10 and 9 times higher than those for hip OA in 2021 (table S6). The DALYs tended to peak in the 60-64 and 55-59 age groups in 1990 and 2021, with higher numbers in females than males (figure 5B-5C). In addition, the proportion of DALYs attributable to total OA, knee OA, and hip OA due to high BMI increased annually (figure 5D and figure S14-S15). ![Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F5.medium.gif) [Figure 5.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F5) Figure 5. The disease burden of OA attributable to high BMI at the global and SDI quintile levels. **(A)** ASDR (per 100,000 population) by sex from 1990 to 2021. **(B-C)** DALYs by age and sex in 1990 and 2021. **(D)** Proportion of DALYs attributable to high BMI among both sexes from 1990 to 2021. OA: osteoarthritis; BMI: body-mass index; SDI: socio-demographic index; DALYs: disability-adjusted life years; ASDR: age-standardized disability-adjusted life years rate. The order of increase in DALYs was observed as follows: middle, low-middle, low, high-middle, and high SDI quintiles. The highest increase amounted to 329.11%, while the lowest was 123.35%. Moreover, the ASDR exhibited a steady upward trajectory over the 32 years. The highest ASDR was documented at 66.70 (95% UI: −6.82-179.94) per 100,000 population in the high SDI quintile, whereas the lowest ASDR was reported at 26.73 (95% UI: −2.09-79.82) per 100,000 population in the low SDI quintile. The ASDRs in the high and high-middle quintiles exceeded the global level, whereas the remaining quintiles fell below it (figure 5A and table S6). The proportion of DALYs of OA across the five SDI quintiles increased, with values of 22.623%, 22.33%, 20.07%, 16.53%, and 14.02% in 2021, descending from the high SDI quintile to low SDI quintile (figure 5D and figure S14). The proportion of attributable DALYs of knee and hip OA also increased (figure S15). ### 3.5 Burden of OA attributable to high BMI at the regional and national levels At the regional level, Southeast Asia, Southern Latin America, and East Asia were the three regions with the fastest growth in ASDR, with EAPCs of 2.65 (95% CI: 2.58-2.73), 2.65 (95% CI: 2.58-2.73), and 2.47 (95% CI: 2.33-2.60) (figures 6A and table S6). The ASDR positively correlated with SDI across different regions. Latin America, Australasia, and Oceania were experiencing faster-than-expected growth, while East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Eastern Europe were growing at a slower-than-expected pace (figure 6B). At the national level, Bangladesh, Viet Nam, and India were the three regions with the fastest growth in ASDR, with EAPCs of 3.11 (95% CI: 2.99-3.23), 2.82 (95% CI: 2.66-2.98), and 2.70 (95% CI: 2.63-2.78) (figures 6C-6E and table S7). There was a positive correlation between ASDR and SDI in various countries. Notably, the United States of America, Australia, and the United Kingdom were observing faster-than-expected growth, while China, India, and Japan were experiencing lower growth than expected (figure 6F). ![Figure 6.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F6.medium.gif) [Figure 6.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F6) Figure 6. The burden of OA attributable to high BMI at the national and national levels. **(A)** ASDR (per 100,000 population) at the national level in 1990 and 2021. **(B)** Correlation between SDI and ASDR at the global and regional levels (r=0.6815, *P*<0.001). **(C-D)** ASDR in 1990 and 2021. **(E)** EAPC. **(F)** Correlation between SDI and ASDR at the national level (r=0.5764, *P*<0.001). OA: osteoarthritis; BMI: body-mass index; SDI: socio-demographic index; DALYs: disability-adjusted life years; ASDR: age-standardized disability-adjusted life years rate. ### 3.6 Projection burden of OA from 2021 to 2050 To obtain an overview of the epidemiological trends of OA over the next 30 years, we projected the ASRs of total OA and rough rates across different age groups using the BAPC models. The ASRs of OA among both sexes, males, and females would increase annually over the next 30 years. ASIR, ASPR, and ASDR would increase from 519.49 (95% CI: 519.39-519.69), 6906.07 (95% CI: 6905.51-6906.62) and 242.52 (95% CI: 242.41-242.62) per 100,000 population in 2021 to 589.54 (95% CI: 409.84-769.23), 7993.76 (95% CI: 6479.29-9508.24) and 281.18 (95% CI: 229.30-333.06) per 100,000 population in 2050, respectively (figure 7). Over the next 30 years, the predicted ASRs of OA would continue to be higher for females than males (figure S16-S17). The predicted incidence, prevalence, and DALYs rates of OA in different age groups would show varying degrees of trend, ultimately showing an increase in 2050 (figure S18-S20). ![Figure 7.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F7.medium.gif) [Figure 7.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/06/30/2024.06.30.24309697/F7) Figure 7. The projection of ASRs (per 100,000 population) of OA globally from 2021 to 2050. OA: osteoarthritis; DALYs: disability-adjusted life years rate; ASRs: age-standardized rates; ASIR: age-standardized incidence rate; ASPR: age-standardized prevalence rate; ASDR: age-standardized disability-adjusted life years rate. ## 4 Discussion At present, OA continues to be a significant public health problem globally. As it is a highly prevalent and disabling disease, it imposes a tremendous disease burden. A comprehensive understanding of the epidemiological trends of OA is essential for developing and implementing effective prevention and treatment strategies. This study presents the most recent findings on the disease burden of OA from 1990 to 2021 at the global, SDI quintile, regional, and national levels based on the GBD Study 2021. The epidemiological trends indicated an increase in incident cases, prevalent cases, DALYs, and ASRs of OA, which increased globally and in all GBD regions and most countries and territories, consistent with previous GBD study reports [6, 15]. DALYs and ASDR of OA related to high BMI showed similar trends. The projected trends from 2021 to 2050 suggest that the disease burden of OA will continue to grow, posing a challenge for healthcare systems worldwide. The diagnosis of OA has improved significantly with the continuous improvement of medical diagnostic and treatment technology, enabling more accurate assessment of the location and type of lesion [15]. Until 2021, there were 46.6 million incident cases, 607.0 million prevalent cases, and 21.3 million DALYs globally, representing a 137.03% increase in OA patients compared to 1990. In particular, the knee OA represented the largest proportion globally. Therefore, it is imperative to prioritise preventive measures, as well as the management and treatment of OA, especially knee OA. Notably, in previous studies and the present study, the incidence, prevalence, and DALYs rates of OA were found to increase with age, possibly due to degenerative changes in different aspects of the capabilities of the body with advancing age [16]. Many patients with advanced OA even need to undergo joint replacement. In addition, the burden of OA was significantly higher in females than in males. Studies have shown that oestrogen plays an important role in maintaining the homeostasis of joint tissues, as well as the joints themselves, and therefore, gender variability in OA is thought to be related to oestrogen-related receptor effects and reduced oestrogen levels [17–19]. These suggested that in formulating future prevention and treatment strategies and implementing measures, emphasis should be placed on the female and middle-aged and elderly groups. The burdens of OA were imbalanced across the five SDI quintiles, which might be explained by the inequalities in obtaining health care [20–23]. Studies have shown that socioeconomic status relates to access to health care, and people with higher socioeconomic status are more likely to have access to specialized health care [24, 25]. Although OA in the high SDI quintile had the highest ASRs, its burden was lower than the middle SDI quintile, which might be attributed to advanced medical conditions [26, 27]. The differences in OA burden across regions and countries may be due to genetic, metabolic, and behavioural factors [6]; in addition, they may also be related to various factors such as ageing populations, rising obesity rates and lack of access to healthcare services. In 2021, the burden of OA was highest in East Asia, South Asia and Western Europe and lowest in the Caribbean and Oceania. The latest World Bank report states that the population of East Asia is already ageing faster than any other region in history. Furthermore, the ASRs were highest in High-income Asia Pacific, high-income North America and Australasia and lowest in Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa, Central Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia in 2021. The higher ASRs in high-income country regions may be related to better healthcare and higher income perception in these regions, allowing more OA cases to be diagnosed and included in the statistics. In contrast, the lower ASRs may be related to factors such as a lack of local healthcare resources, inadequate medical care, and lack of awareness of OA, which has led to under-diagnosis and under-recording of OA cases in the region. At the national level, China, India and the United States have the highest OA burdens. The three countries are the top three populous countries in the world, with the largest populations in both developing and developed countries. Their OA burdens are the highest, firstly, because of the large population bases of these three countries, and secondly, ageing is a common trend in the demographic changes of the three countries. One of our key findings is that OA is becoming more prevalent in developing countries, even though it has traditionally been more common in developed countries. This shift might be attributed to factors such as urbanization, sedentary lifestyles, and changes in dietary habits leading to obesity, all of which are known risk factors for OA. In addition, there was a positive association between SDI and ASRs both at the regional and national levels, indicating that the higher the SDI, the higher the ASR is likely to be. Consistent with previous reports [15, 16]. This study also provides the first systematic elucidation of the global burden of disease associated with BMI in OA from 1990 to 2021. The DALYs of OA attributable to high BMI in 2021 was 4.43 million, accounting for 21% of the total DALYs globally, in line with a GBD 2019 study [1]. Moreover, the attributable DALYs to knee OA increased globally by 207.64%. There is no cure for OA despite its heavy burden, and prevention of OA should focus on its modifiable risk factors, such as the BMI [16, 28–30]. Prospective studies have shown that being overweight or obese increases the risk of hand, hip, and knee OA, with knee OA at greatest risk, and that the risk increases in a dose-response gradient with increasing BMI [31, 32]. Weight loss in obese patients with knee OA is clinically beneficial, as it can reduce pain and improve function [33]. In this study, OA burden was more highly correlated with high BMI in countries with higher SDI than countries with lower SDI. Due to relatively poor economic development, access to adequate food remains a problem in many countries with lower SDI, and people are more likely to engage in physical activities that require high energy expenditure [1, 9]. In contrast, higher-income people consume more fat, salt, and processed foods and have higher rates of obesity [9]. In the next 30 years, the burden of disease in OA will continue to rise; it is essential to prioritize preventive measures and early interventions for osteoarthritis. Public health initiatives promoting physical activity, healthy diet, and weight management can help reduce the risk of developing the disease. Additionally, healthcare systems should focus on improving access to affordable treatments and rehabilitation services for individuals with OA. ## 5 Conclusion In conclusion, the epidemiological trends of OA highlight the growing burden of this condition on a global scale. Addressing this challenge will require a multi-faceted approach involving public health efforts, healthcare system reforms, and strategies to reduce disparities in access to care. By taking proactive steps now, we can work towards mitigating the impact of OA and improving the quality of life for individuals affected by this chronic condition. ## Supporting information Supplementary materials [[supplements/309697_file02.pdf]](pending:yes) ## Author contribution LCQ, MQL, and JH designed the study. FDD, XYW, PW, YJX, HFH and XYF analysed the data and performed the statistical analyses. LCQ, MQL, ZWX, YFS, and RQX drafted the initial manuscript. JW, HD, and JH reviewed the drafted manuscript for critical content. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript. ## Funding This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.81872567). ## Competing interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could influence the work reported in this study. ## Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research. ## Patient consent for publication Not required. ## Research Ethics Approval Not applicable ## Data availability statement The data used for the analyses are publicly available from [http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool](http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool). ## Acknowledgment We thank the staff of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation and its collaborators, and Xiao Ming (Xiaoming_room{at}hotmail.com) for his work in the GBD database. We also thank HOME for Researchers ([https://www.home-for-researchers.com/](https://www.home-for-researchers.com/)) for their help with writing in English. ## Footnotes * **Email address for each co-author:** Lichun Qiao: qlc978402409{at}163.com, Miaoqian Li: L1058427391{at}163.com, Feidan Deng: dfdmnz{at}163.com, Xinyue Wen: 15736116663{at}163.com, Jun Wang: jackey_886{at}163.com, Huan Deng: denghuan0205{at}163.com, Zhaowei Xue: 3120315108{at}stu.xjtu.edu.cn, Ping Wan: wanpingfamily{at}163.com, Rongqi Xiang: 17323475180{at}163.com, Yanjun Xie: I\_Promise\_YJ{at}163.com, Huifang He: hf1545767596{at}163.com, Xiangyu Fan: 18436015241{at}163.com, Yufei Song: 15379586248{at}163.com * Received June 30, 2024. * Revision received June 30, 2024. * Accepted June 30, 2024. * © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ## References 1. [1].Zhao G, Zhu S, Zhang F, Zhang X, Zhang X, Li T, et al. Global Burden of osteoarthritis associated with high body mass index in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. ENDOCRINE. 2023;79(1):60–71. 2. [2].Abramoff B, Caldera FE. Osteoarthritis: Pathology, Diagnosis, and Treatment Options. MED CLIN N AM. 2020;104(2):293–311. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.mcna.2019.10.007&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 3. [3].Geyer M, Schonfeld C. Novel Insights into the Pathogenesis of Osteoarthritis. CURR RHEUMATOL REV. 2018;14(2):98–107. 4. [4].Hunter DJ, Bierma-Zeinstra S. Osteoarthritis. LANCET. 2019;393(10182):1745–59. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30417-9&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 5. [5].Hawker GA. Osteoarthritis is a serious disease. CLIN EXP RHEUMATOL. 2019;37 Suppl 120(5):3–6. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 6. [6].Global, regional, and national burden of osteoarthritis, 1990-2020 and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. LANCET RHEUMATOL. 2023;5(9):e508–22. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S2665-9913(23)00163-7&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=37675071&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 7. [7].Palazzo C, Nguyen C, Lefevre-Colau MM, Rannou F, Poiraudeau S. Risk factors and burden of osteoarthritis. ANN PHYS REHABIL MED. 2016;59(3):134–8. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.rehab.2016.01.006&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26904959&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 8. [8].Wenham CY, Conaghan PG. New horizons in osteoarthritis. AGE AGEING. 2013; 42(3):272–8. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ageing/aft043&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23568255&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 9. [9].Song M, Chen H, Li J, Han W, Wu W, Wu G, et al. A comparison of the burden of knee osteoarthritis attributable to high body mass index in China and globally from 1990 to 2019. FRONT MED-LAUSANNE. 2023;10:1200294. 10. [10].Hunter DJ, Schofield D, Callander E. The individual and socioeconomic impact of osteoarthritis. NAT REV RHEUMATOL. 2014;10(7):437–41. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nrrheum.2014.44&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24662640&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 11. [11].Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteoarthrosis. ANN RHEUM DIS. 1957;16(4):494–502. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czoxMToiYW5ucmhldW1kaXMiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiMTYvNC80OTQiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNi8zMC8yMDI0LjA2LjMwLjI0MzA5Njk3LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 12. [12].Kohn MD, Sassoon AA, Fernando ND. Classifications in Brief: Kellgren-Lawrence Classification of Osteoarthritis. CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R. 2016;474(8):1886–93. 13. [13].Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M, Thomson B, Graetz N, Margono C, et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. LANCET. 2014; 384(9945):766–81. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60460-8&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24880830&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000341361500037&link_type=ISI) 14. [14].Afshin A, Forouzanfar MH, Reitsma MB, Sur P, Estep K, Lee A, et al. Health Effects of Overweight and Obesity in 195 Countries over 25 Years. NEW ENGL J MED. 2017; 377(1):13–27. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa1614362&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28604169&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 15. [15].Chen X, Tang H, Lin J, Zeng R. Temporal trends in the disease burden of osteoarthritis from 1990 to 2019, and projections until 2030. PLOS ONE. 2023;18(7). 16. [16].Safiri S, Kolahi AA, Smith E, Hill C, Bettampadi D, Mansournia MA, et al. Global, regional and national burden of osteoarthritis 1990-2017: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. ANN RHEUM DIS. 2020;79(6):819–28. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTE6ImFubnJoZXVtZGlzIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6Ijc5LzYvODE5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDYvMzAvMjAyNC4wNi4zMC4yNDMwOTY5Ny5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 17. [17].Tang J, Liu T, Wen X, Zhou Z, Yan J, Gao J, et al. Estrogen-related receptors: novel potential regulators of osteoarthritis pathogenesis. MOL MED. 2021;27(1):5. 18. [18].Roman-Blas JA, Castaneda S, Largo R, Herrero-Beaumont G. Osteoarthritis associated with estrogen deficiency. ARTHRITIS RES THER. 2009;11(5):241. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/ar2791&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19804619&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 19. [19].Feng X, Cai D, Yu X, Zhou S, Jing W. Analysis of current status and trends of disease burden of knee osteoarthritis in China based on GBD big data. Modern Preventive Medicine. 2022;49(10):1753–60. 20. [20].Deng Y, Zhao P, Zhou L, Xiang D, Hu J, Liu Y, et al. Epidemiological trends of tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer at the global, regional, and national levels: a population-based study. J HEMATOL ONCOL. 2020;13(1):98. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1186/s13045-020-00915-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 21. [21].Dickman SL, Himmelstein DU, Woolhandler S. Inequality and the health-care system in the USA. LANCET. 2017;389(10077):1431–41. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30398-7&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 22. [22].Durán IP. Health Care Inequality in Spain After the Economic Crisis: the Health Delivery System and the Public Private Sector Mix. Global social welfare : research, policy & practice. 2016; 3(3):179–91. 23. [23].Baum N, Kum Y, Shalit H, Tal M. Inequalities in a National Health Care System From the Perspective of Social Workers in Israel. QUAL HEALTH RES. 2017;27(6):855–65. 24. [24].Filc D, Davidovich N, Novack L, Balicer RD. Is socioeconomic status associated with utilization of health care services in a single-payer universal health care system? INT J EQUITY HEALTH. 2014;13:115. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 25. [25].Lueckmann SL, Hoebel J, Roick J, Markert J, Spallek J, von Dem KO, et al. Socioeconomic inequalities in primary-care and specialist physician visits: a systematic review. INT J EQUITY HEALTH. 2021;20(1):58. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 26. [26].Barry DT, Glenn CP, Hoff RA, Potenza MN. Group differences in pain interference, psychiatric disorders, and general medical conditions among Hispanics and whites in the U.S. general population. PSYCHIAT RES. 2017;258:337–43. 27. [27].Spann SJ. Interspeciality differences in medical resource utilization. J FAM PRACTICE. 2000;49(1):18–9. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10678334&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) 28. [28].Silverwood V, Blagojevic-Bucknall M, Jinks C, Jordan JL, Protheroe J, Jordan KP. Current evidence on risk factors for knee osteoarthritis in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. OSTEOARTHR CARTILAGE. 2015;23(4):507–15. 29. [29].Jiang L, Rong J, Wang Y, Hu F, Bao C, Li X, et al. The relationship between body mass index and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JOINT BONE SPINE. 2011;78(2):150–5. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jbspin.2010.04.011&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20580591&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000288017400009&link_type=ISI) 30. [30].Mork PJ, Holtermann A, Nilsen TI. Effect of body mass index and physical exercise on risk of knee and hip osteoarthritis: longitudinal data from the Norwegian HUNT Study. J EPIDEMIOL COMMUN H. 2012;66(8):678–83. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiamVjaCI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI2Ni84LzY3OCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA2LzMwLzIwMjQuMDYuMzAuMjQzMDk2OTcuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 31. [31].Reyes C, Leyland KM, Peat G, Cooper C, Arden NK, Prieto-Alhambra D. Association Between Overweight and Obesity and Risk of Clinically Diagnosed Knee, Hip, and Hand Osteoarthritis: A Population-Based Cohort Study. ARTHRITIS RHEUMATOL. 2016;68(8):1869–75. 32. [32].Zheng H, Chen C. Body mass index and risk of knee osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ OPEN. 2015;5(12):e7568. 33. [33].Lee R, Kean WF. Obesity and knee osteoarthritis. INFLAMMOPHARMACOLOGY. 2012;20(2):53–8. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s10787-011-0118-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22237485&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F06%2F30%2F2024.06.30.24309697.atom)