RESUMEN

Objetivo: Estudiar la utilidad a largo plazo de un reumatólogo consultor in situ (RCI) en un centro de salud (CS). Material y métodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo sobre la cohorte completa de pacientes atendidos entre 2013 y 2019. Se analizaron lsa variables clínicas y de curso asistencial, intentando perfilar qué diagnósticos de los pacientes reumáticos tenían más probabilidades de continuar su atención en el CS con el médico de Atención Primaria (MAP). Resultados: Se atendieron 876 consultas; 205 de varones (23,4%) y 671 de mujeres (76,6%), con una edad media de 64,1 años (DE=16,6). La mayoría de las consultas (280; 33,2%) fueron diagnósticas. En 167 ocasiones (19,8%) se abordaron temas terapéuticos; en 47 (5,6%) se realizaron infiltraciones. La petición de pruebas no disponibles para el MAP se verificó en 154 situaciones (18,3%). El perfil de paciente con más opciones de continuar su seguimiento con el MAP en el CS es el que tenía artrosis (OR=0,13; IC 95%: 0,02-0,67), reumatismo de partes blandas (OR=0,06; IC 95%: 0,01-0,45) o hernia discal cervical (OR=0,13; IC 95%: 0,02-0,66). Los pacientes con menos probabilidades de seguimiento por MAP tras su paso por RCI son los que tenían artritis reumatoide (OR=0,03; IC 95%: 0,00-0,24), otras artropatías inflamatorias (OR=0,36; IC 95%: 0,16-0,80) o polimialgia reumática (OR=0,19; IC 95%: 0,06-0,64); también los que necesitan control de enfermo crónico (OR=0,16; IC 95%: 0,07-0,34). Conclusiones: El RCI facilita el seguimiento por el MAP de la artrosis, reumatismos de partes blandas y de la discopatía cervical, pues le permite disponer de determinadas pruebas complementarias para el diagnóstico.(AU)

Objective: To report the long-term experience of a rheumatologist consultant in situ (RCI) in a primary care centre (PCC). Material and methods: Observational retrospective study analysing the complete cohort of the patients seen by the RCI between 2013 and 2019. Rheumatology patients’ clinical characteristics and course of care were collected to estimate the diagnoses that were most likely to be monitored by a primary care physician (PCP). Results: A total of 876 consultations were attended; 205 were men (23.4%) and 671 women (76.6%). Most of the consultations (280, 33.2%) were diagnostic. On 167 occasions (19.8%) therapeutic issues were analysed; in 47 (5.6%) therapeutic infiltrations were performed. Chronic patient control was applied in 163 subjects (19.3%). A request for tests not available to the PCP was the reason for the consultation in 154 situations (18.3%). The profile most likely to continue being monitored in the PCC is the patient with osteoarthritis (OR=0.13, CI 95%: 0.02-0.67), soft tissue rheumatism (OR=0.006, 95%CI: 0.01-0.45) or cervical disc herniation (OR=0.13, 95%CI: 0.02-0.66). Less likely to be monitored by PCP after being seen by the RCI were subjects with rheumatoid arthritis (OR=0.03, 95%CI: 0.00-0.24), other inflammatory arthropathies (OR=0.36, 95%CI: 0.16-0.80) or with polymyalgia rheumatica (OR=0.19, 95%CI: 0.06-0.64), and those in need of chronic disease monitoring (OR=0.16, 95%CI: 0.07-0.34). Conclusions: The RCI makes it easier for the PCP to monitor patients with osteoarthritis, soft tissue rheumatism and cervical disc pathology.(AU)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term experience of a rheumatologist consultant "in situ" (RCI) in a primary care centre (PCC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational retrospective study analysing the complete cohort of the patients seen by the RCI between 2013 and 2019. Rheumatology patients' clinical characteristics and course of care were collected to estimate the diagnoses that were most likely to be monitored by a primary care physician (PCP). RESULTS: A total of 876 consultations were attended; 205 were men (23.4%) and 671 women (76.6%).Most of the consultations (280, 33.2%) were diagnostic. On 167 occasions (19.8%) therapeutic issues were analysed; in 47 (5.6%) therapeutic infiltrations were performed. Chronic patient control was applied in 163 subjects (19.3%). A request for tests not available to the PCP was the reason for the consultation in 154 situations (18.3%). The profile most likely to continue being monitored in the PCC is the patient with osteoarthritis (OR = .13, CI 95%: .02-.67), soft tissue rheumatism (OR = .006, 95% CI: .01-.45) or cervical disc herniation (OR = .13, 95% CI: .02-.66). Less likely to be monitored by PCP after being seen by the RCI were subjects with rheumatoid arthritis (OR = .03, 95% CI: .00-.24), other inflammatory arthropathies (OR = .36, 95% CI: .16-.80) or with polymyalgia rheumatica (OR = .19, 95% CI: .06-.64 ), and those in need of chronic disease monitoring (OR = .16, 95% CI: .07-.34). CONCLUSIONS: The RCI makes it easier for the PCP to monitor patients with osteoarthritis, soft tissue rheumatism and cervical disc pathology.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term experience of a rheumatologist consultant in situ (RCI) in a primary care centre (PCC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational retrospective study analysing the complete cohort of the patients seen by the RCI between 2013 and 2019. Rheumatology patients' clinical characteristics and course of care were collected to estimate the diagnoses that were most likely to be monitored by a primary care physician (PCP). RESULTS: A total of 876 consultations were attended; 205 were men (23.4%) and 671 women (76.6%). Most of the consultations (280, 33.2%) were diagnostic. On 167 occasions (19.8%) therapeutic issues were analysed; in 47 (5.6%) therapeutic infiltrations were performed. Chronic patient control was applied in 163 subjects (19.3%). A request for tests not available to the PCP was the reason for the consultation in 154 situations (18.3%). The profile most likely to continue being monitored in the PCC is the patient with osteoarthritis (OR=0.13, CI 95%: 0.02-0.67), soft tissue rheumatism (OR=0.006, 95%CI: 0.01-0.45) or cervical disc herniation (OR=0.13, 95%CI: 0.02-0.66). Less likely to be monitored by PCP after being seen by the RCI were subjects with rheumatoid arthritis (OR=0.03, 95%CI: 0.00-0.24), other inflammatory arthropathies (OR=0.36, 95%CI: 0.16-0.80) or with polymyalgia rheumatica (OR=0.19, 95%CI: 0.06-0.64), and those in need of chronic disease monitoring (OR=0.16, 95%CI: 0.07-0.34). CONCLUSIONS: The RCI makes it easier for the PCP to monitor patients with osteoarthritis, soft tissue rheumatism and cervical disc pathology.

Asunto(s)