Outcomes in patient education programmes for people with rheumatic diseases: Results from a Delphi process and a study of feasibility and responsiveness

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-203
Author(s):  
Renate Røe ◽  
Kjersti Grønning ◽  
Liv Rognerud Eriksson ◽  
Heidi A. Zangi
2013 ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
Rennie L. Rhee ◽  
Joan M. Von Feldt ◽  
H. Ralph Schumacher ◽  
Peter A. Merkel

Rheumatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Ingegnoli ◽  
Ariane L Herrick ◽  
Tommaso Schioppo ◽  
Francesca Bartoli ◽  
Nicola Ughi ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives The level of detail included when describing nailfold videocapillaroscopy (NVC) methods varies among research studies, making interpretation and comparison of results challenging. The overarching objective of the present study was to seek consensus on the reporting standards in NVC methodology for clinical research in rheumatic diseases and to propose a pragmatic reporting checklist. Methods Based on the items derived from a systematic review focused on this topic, a three-step web-based Delphi consensus on minimum reporting standards in NVC was performed among members of the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) Study Group on Microcirculation in Rheumatic Diseases and the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium. Results A total of 319 articles were selected by the systematic review, and 46 items were proposed in the Delphi process. This Delphi exercise was completed by 80 participants from 31 countries, including Australia and countries within Asia, Europe, North America and South America. Agreement was reached on items covering three main areas: patient preparation before NVC (15 items), device description (5 items) and examination details (13 items). Conclusion Based on the available evidence, the description of NVC methods was highly heterogeneous in the identified studies and differed markedly on several items. A reporting checklist of 33 items, based on practical suggestions made (using a Delphi process) by international participants, has been developed to provide guidance to improve and standardize the NVC methodology to be applied in future clinical research studies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1884.2-1884
Author(s):  
R. Pineda-Sic ◽  
M. M. Castañeda-Martínez ◽  
I. D. J. Hernandez-Galarza ◽  
E. I. Guevara Elizondo ◽  
D. E. Flores Alvarado ◽  
...  

Background:Adherence to medications among patients with rheumatic diseases is often suboptimal.1Adherence to treatment has been described to be affected by several factors.2The rheumatologist plays a crucial role in influencing adherence behavior by addressing perceptions about medication, providing information, and establishing trust in the treatment plan.3There is no record of attitudes and thoughts of Mexico’s rheumatologists about adherence to medication.Objectives:To know the rheumatologist’s attitudes regarding treatment adherence in follow up consultation.Methods:Descriptive, cross sectional study. Rheumatologists from across the country were invited to respond an electronic survey created with Google Forms, link was sent by Whatsapp ® message, responses were anonymous. The survey was constructed taking into account the main barriers of adherence related to the doctor. Seven questions were created, from one to six were multiple selections and the seven were open question1.Where do you practice medicine? 2.Do you ask all your patients about adherence medication? 3.If your answer was positive, do you ask individually for each drug? 4.How long do you spend on explaining: side effects, benefits, and mechanisms of action of drugs? 5 Do you discuss available treatment options with your patients to decide one? 6.What’s the definition of adherence? 7.Which activities can the doctor do to improve adherence to their patients?Results:Data were collected from 158 rheumatologists who completed the survey. Regarding the question where they practice medicine, 19.5% answered they work in public medical institutions, 31.8% do private practice and 48.7% work in both of them, 88.3% answered correctly adherence definition, 93% of rheumatologists ask for adherence to medication in the follow up consultation and only 86.1% do it individually for each medication, 97.4% discuss therapeutic options with their patients. The time used to explain treatment is presented in Figure 1. The interventions considered by rheumatologists to increase adherence are reported in Table 1.Table 1Interventions considered by rheumatologists to increase adherencePatient education(in follow up consultation, conferences, pamphlets)Develop rapportwith patient. (“be accessible”, “answer questions” “make the patient part of“ don’t be paternalistic or authoritarian”)Adherence measure(Use the available method, questionnaires, self-report, drug levels, electronic pillbox, pill count, etc. “Don’t matter which one, measure it!“)Interventions for no adherence reasons(phone calls, text messages, telephone alarms) fixed schedules for each medication, cognitive-behavioral therapy, access to medications)Family support networkPresented in order to frequencies and grouped by topicConclusion:Rheumatologists ask for adherence medication but more than half use a limited amount of time to explain about medication, nevertheless, they think that patient education is the best intervention to increase adherence.References:[1]Pasma, Annelieke et.al Facilitators and Barriers to Adherence in the Initiation Phase of Disease modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD) Use in Patients with Arthritis Who Recently Started Their First DMARD Treatment, The Journal of Rheumatology (2013) DOI:10.3899/jrheum.140693.[2]M.F. M. Improving treatment adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: What are the options? Int J Clin Rheumtol. 2015;10(5):345–56.[3]Voshaar et al. Barriers and facilitators to disease modifying antirheumatic drug use in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a qualitative theory-based study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders (2016) 17:442 DOI 10.1186/s12891-016-1289-zDisclosure of Interests:None declared


1988 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawren H. Daltroy ◽  
Matthew H. Liang

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document