RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the substitution of specialized rheumatology nurses for rheumatologists in diagnosing fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: Referred patients with FM symptoms (n = 193) were randomized to a study group diagnosed by a specialized rheumatology nurse (SRN group, n = 97) or to a control group diagnosed by a rheumatologist (RMT group, n = 96). SRN patients were seen within 3 weeks by a nurse who took structured history and initiated routine laboratory tests. During a 5-minute supervision session, the rheumatologist was informed by the nurse about medical history, performed a brief physical examination, and confirmed or rejected the nurse's diagnosis. RMT patients were seen by a rheumatologist after a regular waiting period of 3 months. Outcome measures were initial agreement between the nurse and rheumatologist in the SRN group, final diagnosis after 12-24 months of followup, patient satisfaction, and diagnostic costs. RESULTS: The mean waiting time after randomization was 2.8 and 12.1 weeks in the SRN and RMT groups, respectively. Eight RMT patients cancelled their appointments because of the waiting time. Excellent agreement (kappa = 0.91) between rheumatologists and nurses was found. After 12-24 months of followup, none of the initial diagnoses were recalled in either group. SRN patients were significantly more satisfied than RMT patients. Mean diagnostic costs were lower in the SRN group (euro219) than in the RMT group (euro281) (95% uncertainty interval euro-103, euro-20). CONCLUSION: Substituting specialized nurses for rheumatologists in the diagnostic process of FM is a trustworthy and successful approach that saves waiting time, provides greater patient satisfaction, and is cost-effective.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The workload at many outpatient clinics within the Dutch health care system has been growing relentlessly, resulting in unacceptable waiting lists and reduced accessibility. Assessing streams of patients and introducing a method of accelerated referral of patients back to the general practitioner (GP) under specialist guidance could help to alleviate these problems. METHODS: Seventeen GPs collaborated with rheumatologists during a 2-year period in a 'joint consultation' model in which GPs and rheumatologists discussed patients together. All patient charts belonging to patients who had been referred to the outpatient clinic by these 17 GPs were identified. Rheumatologists assessed whether or not these patients could be referred back to the participating GPs under the guidance of the specialist in the joint consultation model. RESULTS: Of 276 eligible patients, 121 were discharged from the outpatient clinic. Eighty-seven patients required specialist follow-up, 22 patients refused to participate, and six patients were not entered into the study by the rheumatologist. Some 21 patients eventually entered the study, 18 of whom were referred back to the GP. CONCLUSION: The role of joint consultation appears to be limited. Improving the referral behavior of GPs should take precedence over transferring follow-up from the outpatient clinic to the primary care level.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of regular referral by general practitioners to the Rheumatology outpatients' clinic with that of joint consultations by general practitioners (GPs) and rheumatologists, and to compare the subsequent treatment policy followed. DESIGN: Randomised. METHOD: In 1999 and 2000 all rheumatological patients who, according to the 17 participating GPs in the Maastricht region had an indication for referral, were referred to the outpatients' clinic or seen during a joint consultation where three GPs and one rheumatologist decided on a treatment policy in the presence of the patient. Agreement about diagnosis and diagnostic and therapeutic approaches between the rheumatologists and GPs was determined using questionnaires. The patient's state of health was assessed using the 'EuroQol health-related quality of life questionnaire' (EuroQol) and their satisfaction was determined by means of questionnaires. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-six patients were included: 45 (27%) men and 121 (73%) women, with an average age of 53.7 years (SD: 14). The rheumatologists and the GPs differed in opinion on the diagnosis in 64% of the patients. Agreement on diagnosis resulted in greater agreement on the treatment policy than when there were discrepancies about the diagnosis. The rheumatologist used additional diagnostic tools and follow-up consultations at the outpatient clinic (78% and 65%) more frequently than during the joint consultation (44% and 15%). Patient satisfaction and general state of health were comparable in both groups.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of joint consultation on referral behaviour of general practitioners (GPs) in a prospective cohort study. METHODS: All patients with rheumatological complaints that 17 participating GPs, from the area of the University Hospital Maastricht, wanted to refer during a two year inclusion period (n=166) were eligible for inclusion. These patients were either referred to the outpatient clinic, or presented at a joint consultation held every six weeks at the practice of the GP, where groups of three GPs presented their patients to a visiting, consulting rheumatologist. The number of patients referred by each GP a year at the end of the trial, comparing participating and non-participating GPs, was the main outcome measure. RESULTS: During two years of inclusion, the 17 participating GPs presented 166 patients. The number of patients referred by each GP a year decreased for the participating GPs by 62% at the end of the whole study. By contrast, non-participating GPs maintained the same rate of referral. The range of diagnoses remained proportionally the same throughout the study, with the exception of fibromyalgia. The referral rate of this diagnosis decreased significantly (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Joint consultation seems to be a good strategy in influencing the referral behaviour of GPs in the area of rheumatology. The decrease in referral is substantial and can subsequently lead to a reduction of waiting lists.

Asunto(s)