RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Nowadays, the recommended measures for optimal monitoring of axial Spondyloarthritis (ax-SpA) disease activity are either BASDAI and CRP, or ASDAS-CRP. However, there could be a gap between recommendations and daily practice. We aimed to determine the measures collected by rheumatologists in an ax-SpA follow-up visit, and to determine the impact of a meeting (where rheumatologists reached a consensus on the measures to be collected) on the collection of such measures. METHODS: A consensual meeting of a local network of 32 rheumatologists proposed, four months later, to report at least the BASDAI score in the medical file of every ax-SpA patient at every follow-up visit. An independent investigator reviewed the medical files of 10 consecutive patients per rheumatologist, seen twice during the year (e.g. before and after the meeting). The most frequently collected measures were assessed, and then, the frequency of collection before and after the meeting was compared. RESULTS: A total of 456 medical files from 228 patients were reviewed. Treatment (>60%), CRP (51.3%) and total BASDAI (28.5%) were the most reported measures in medical files. Before/After the meeting, the frequencies of collected measures in medical files were 28.5%/51.7%, 51.3%/52.2%, 16.7%/31.6% and 0.9%/6.1% for BASDAI, CRP, BASDAI + CRP and ASDAS, respectively reaching a statistically significance for BASDAI, ASDAS and BASDAI+CRP (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed a low rate of systematic report of the recommended outcome measures in ax-SpA. However, it suggests that a consensual meeting involving practicing rheumatologists might be relevant to improve the implementation of such recommendations.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Reumatología , Espondilitis Anquilosante , Adulto , Femenino , Francia , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Indicadores de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/métodos , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Reumatología/métodos , Reumatología/normas , Espondilitis Anquilosante/diagnóstico , Espondilitis Anquilosante/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: An annual assessment of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is recommended, but its practical modalities have not been determined. The objective was to assess the feasibility and usefulness of a standardized CV risk assessment in RA, performed by rheumatologists during outpatient clinics. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional design within a network of rheumatologists. Each rheumatologist included 5 consecutive unselected patients with definite RA. Data collection included standardized assessment of CV risk factors: blood pressure, interpretation of glycemia and of lipid levels, and calculation of the Framingham CV risk score. Outcome criteria included feasibility (missing data and time taken to assess the patients) and usefulness (the CV risk assessment was considered useful if at least 1 modifiable and previously unknown CV risk factor was evidenced). RESULTS: Twenty-two rheumatologists (77% in office-based practice) assessed 110 RA patients. The mean ± SD age was 57 ± 10 years, and the mean ± SD RA duration was 11 ± 9 years; 50 patients (45%) were treated with biologic agents, and 76% were women. Regarding feasibility, missing data were most frequent for glycemia (27% of patients) and cholesterolemia (14% of patients). The mean ± SD duration of the CV risk assessment was 15 ± 5 minutes. The CV risk assessment was considered useful in 33 patients (30%), evidencing dyslipidemia (15% of patients) or high blood pressure (9% of patients) as the most frequently previously unknown CV risk factor. CONCLUSION: The assessment of CV risk factors is feasible, but labor intensive, during an outpatient rheumatology clinic. This assessment identified modifiable CV risk factors in 30% of the patients. These results suggest that RA patients are not sufficiently assessed and treated for CV risk factors.