Rheuma-VOR study: optimising healthcare of rheumatic diseases by multiprofessional coordinating centres.

OBJECTIVES: Early diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis is critical to prevent joint damage and functional incapacities. However, the discrepancy between recommendations of early diagnosis and reality is remarkable. The Rheuma-VOR study aimed to improve the time to diagnosis of patients with early arthritis by coordinating cooperation between primary care physicians, specialists and patients in Germany. METHODS: This prospective non-randomised multicentre study involved 2340 primary care physicians, 72 rheumatologists, 4 university hospitals and 4 rheumatology centres in 4 German Federal States. The two coprimary endpoints (time to diagnosis and screening performance of primary care physicians) were evaluated for early versus late implementation phase. Additionally, time to diagnosis and secondary endpoints (decrease of disease activity, increase in quality of life and overall well-being, improvement of fatigue, depression, functional ability, and work ability, reduction in drug and medical costs and hospitalisation) were compared with a reference cohort of the German Rheumatism Research Centre (DRFZ) reflecting standard care. RESULTS: A total of 7049 patients were enrolled in the coordination centres and 1537 patients were diagnosed with a rheumatic disease and consented to further participation. A follow-up consultation after 1 year was realised in 592 patients. The time to diagnosis endpoint and the secondary endpoints were met. In addition, the calculation of cost-effectiveness shows that Rheuma-VOR has a dominant cost-benefit ratio compared with standard care. DISCUSSION: Rheuma-VOR has shown an improvement in rheumatological care, patient-reported outcome parameters and cost savings by coordinating the cooperation of primary care physicians, rheumatologists and patients, in a nationwide approach.

[Delegation of medical duties to qualified rheumatology assistants : Effect on depression and anxiety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis]. / Delegation ärztlicher Leistungen an rheumatologische Fachassistenten : Effekte auf Depression und Angst bei Patienten mit rheumatoider Arthritis.

BACKGROUND: At least 1 comorbidity occurs in 80% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition to cardiovascular comorbidities psychological comorbid conditions are common. The prevalence of depression and anxiety is higher in patients than in the general population. Screening for comorbidities is crucial. A shortage of outpatient specialist care barely allows resources for this. The implementation of team-based care holds the potential to improve the standard of care while simultaneously working against the shortage of care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the effects of care on the course of depression and anxiety in patients with seropositive RA and active disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial was conducted over the course of 1 year with 224 patients. After baseline, five more visits followed. In the intervention group (IG), three were initially carried out by qualified rheumatological assistants. Depression, anxiety and patient satisfaction with outpatient care were looked at in detail. RESULTS: In the IG the anxiety symptoms significantly improved over 12 months (p = 0.036). The proportions of patients with anxiety also significantly changed in the IG (p < 0.001), while there was no change in the control group between baseline and month 12. The values of the depression scale did not differ significantly (p = 0.866). In terms of the information dimension of the satisfaction questionnaire, patients in the IG felt significantly better informed after 6 months (p = 0.013) and 12 months (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: A positive effect of team-based care on the course of depression and anxiety in patients with seropositive RA and active disease could be shown.

Disseminating and assessing implementation of the EULAR recommendations for patient education in inflammatory arthritis: a mixed-methods study with patients' perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To explore patients' agreement and reasons for agreement or disagreement with the EULAR recommendations for patient education (PE) for people with inflammatory arthritis (IA). METHODS: This mixed-method survey collected data using snowball sampling. The survey had been translated into 20 languages by local healthcare professionals, researchers and patient research partners. It explored the degree to which patients with IA agreed with each recommendation for PE (0=do not agree at all and 10=agree completely) and their rationale for their agreement level in free text questions. Descriptive statistics summarised participants' demographics and agreement levels. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyse the free text data. Sixteen subcategories were developed, describing the reasons for agreement or disagreement with the recommendations, which constituted the categories. RESULTS: The sample comprised 2779 participants (79% female), with a mean (SD) age 55.1 (13.1) years and disease duration 17.1 (13.3) years. Participants strongly agreed with most recommendations (median 10 (IQR: 9-10) for most recommendations). Reasons for agreement with the recommendations included the benefit of using PE to facilitate collaborative care and shared decision making, the value of flexible and tailored PE, and the value of gaining support from other patients. Reasons for disagreement included lack of resources for PE, not wanting information to be tailored by healthcare professionals and a reluctance to use telephone-based PE. CONCLUSION: The EULAR recommendations for PE have been disseminated among patients with IA. Overall, agreement levels were very high, suggesting that they reflect patients' preferences for engaging in collaborative clinical care and using PE to facilitate and supplement their own understanding of IA. Reasons for not completely agreeing with the recommendations can inform implementation strategies and education of healthcare professionals.

Effect of nurse-led care on outcomes in patients with ACPA/RF-positive rheumatoid arthritis with active disease undergoing treat-to-target: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the non-inferiority of nurse-led care (NLC) in patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)-positive and/or rheumatoid factor (RF)-positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with active disease who are starting disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, following treat-to-target (T2T) recommendations. METHODS: A multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial was conducted to assess clinical effectiveness, anxiety, depression and patient satisfaction following a non-inferiority design. The participants were 224 adults with ACPA/RF-positive RA who were randomly assigned to either NLC or rheumatologist-led care (RLC). The primary outcome was the Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints measured with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) assessed at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A DAS28-CRP difference of 0.6 was set as the non-inferiority margin. Mean differences between the groups were assessed following per-protocol and intention-to-treat strategies. RESULTS: Demographic data and baseline characteristics of patients in the NLC group (n=111) were comparable to those of patients in the RLC group (n=113). The improvement in disease activity (change in DAS28-CRP, primary outcome) over the course of 12 months was significant in both groups (p<0.001). No significant differences were observed between the NLC and RLC groups (p=0.317). Non-inferiority of NLC was shown for the primary outcome and all secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study supported the non-inferiority of NLC in managing T2T and follow-up care of patients with RA with moderate to high disease activity and poor prognostic factors in addition to RLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00013055.