OP0146 The Impact of Ultrasound on the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) in Routine Clinical Care Within the UK

2013 ◽  
Vol 72 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A101.2-A101 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kelly ◽  
B. Davidson ◽  
C. Gorman ◽  
G. Meenagh ◽  
P. Reynolds
2020 ◽  
pp. flgastro-2020-101563
Author(s):  
Stephanie Shields ◽  
Allan Dunlop ◽  
John Paul Seenan ◽  
Jonathan Macdonald

COVID-19 has dominated life in 2020 with, at the time of writing, over 4.9M global cases and >320 000 deaths. The impact has been most intensely felt in acute and critical care environments. However, with most UK elective work postponed, laboratory testing of faecal calprotectin halted due to potential risk of viral transmission and non-emergency endoscopies and surgeries cancelled, the secondary impact on chronic illnesses such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is becoming apparent. Data from the Scottish Biologic Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) service shows a dramatic drop in TDM testing since the pandemic onset. April 2020 saw a 75.6% reduction in adalimumab testing and a 36.2% reduction in infliximab testing when compared with February 2020 data, a reduction coinciding with the widespread cancellation of outpatient and elective activity. It is feared that disruption to normal patterns of care and disease monitoring of biologic patients could increase the risk of disease flare and adverse clinical outcomes. Urgent changes in clinical practice have been instigated to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on routine clinical care. Further transformations are needed to maintain safe, effective, patient-centred IBD care in the future.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e024012
Author(s):  
Katherine Morton ◽  
Sarah Voss ◽  
Joy Adamson ◽  
Helen Baxter ◽  
Karen Bloor ◽  
...  

IntroductionPressure continues to grow on emergency departments in the UK and throughout the world, with declining performance and adverse effects on patient outcome, safety and experience. One proposed solution is to locate general practitioners to work in or alongside the emergency department (GPED). Several GPED models have been introduced, however, evidence of effectiveness is weak. This study aims to evaluate the impact of GPED on patient care, the primary care and acute hospital team and the wider urgent care system.Methods and analysisThe study will be divided into three work packages (WPs). WP-A; Mapping and Taxonomy: mapping, description and classification of current models of GPED in all emergency departments in England and interviews with key informants to examine the hypotheses that underpin GPED. WP-B; Quantitative Analysis of National Data: measurement of the effectiveness, costs and consequences of the GPED models identified in WP-A, compared with a no-GPED model, using retrospective analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics Data. WP-C; Case Studies: detailed case studies of different GPED models using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods including: non-participant observation of clinical care, semistructured interviews with staff, patients and carers; workforce surveys with emergency department staff and analysis of available local routinely collected hospital data. Prospective case study sites will be identified by completing telephone interviews with sites awarded capital funding by the UK government to implement GPED initiatives. The study has a strong patient and public involvement group that has contributed to study design and materials, and which will be closely involved in data interpretation and dissemination.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the National Health Service East Midlands—Leicester South Research Ethics Committee: 17/EM/0312. The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and a planned programme of knowledge mobilisation.Trial registration numberISRCTN51780222.


Author(s):  
David Holland ◽  
Adrian Heald ◽  
Mike Stedman ◽  
Lewis Green ◽  
Jonathan Scargill ◽  
...  

Our findings illustrate the widespread collateral impact of implementing measures to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 in people with, or being investigated for diabetes mellitus (DM). Ironically, failure to focus of the wider implications for people with DM and other groups with long-term conditions, may place them at increased risk of poor outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection itself, irrespective of the implications for their longer-term health prospects.


F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 979
Author(s):  
Helena Watson ◽  
James McLaren ◽  
Naomi Carlisle ◽  
Nandiran Ratnavel ◽  
Tim Watts ◽  
...  

The best way to ensure that preterm infants benefit from relevant neonatal expertise as soon as they are born is to transfer the mother and baby to an appropriately specialised neonatal facility before birth (“in utero”). This review explores the evidence surrounding the importance of being born in the right unit, the advantages of in utero transfers compared to ex utero transfers, and how to accurately assess which women are at most risk of delivering early and the challenges of in utero transfers. Accurate identification of the women most at risk of preterm birth is key to prioritising who to transfer antenatally, but the administrative burden and pathway variation of in utero transfer in the UK are likely to compromise optimal clinical care. Women reported the impact that in utero transfers have on them, including the emotional and financial burdens of being transferred and the anxiety surrounding domestic and logistical concerns related to being away from home. The final section of the review explores new approaches to reforming the in utero transfer process, including learning from outside the UK and changing policy and guidelines. Examples of collaborative regional guidance include the recent Pan-London guidance on in utero transfers. Reforming the transfer process can also be aided through technology, such as utilising the CotFinder app. In utero transfer is an unavoidable aspect of maternity and neonatal care, and the burden will increase if preterm birth rates continue to rise in association with increased rates of multiple pregnancy, advancing maternal age, assisted reproductive technologies, and obstetric interventions. As funding and capacity pressures on health services increase because of the COVID-19 pandemic, better prioritisation and sustained multi-disciplinary commitment are essential to maximise better outcomes for babies born too soon.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1015.2-1016
Author(s):  
K. Tymms ◽  
T. Smith ◽  
C. Deakin ◽  
T. Freeman ◽  
D. Hoffman ◽  
...  

Background:Registry studies and clinical trials are increasingly incorporating patient reported outcomes (PROs) to measure the full burden of disease and better measure the efficacy and value of medicines; however, the burden of paper-based surveys, time constraints, and privacy concerns impede the widespread use of PROs in routine clinical care.Objectives:To develop a simple and secure technological solution to incorporate validated PROs into routine clinical care for patients with rheumatic diseases, and to assess the patient response to functional assessment of chronic illness therapy fatigue (FACIT-F), patient health questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2), and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) questionnaires delivered using this ePRO method.Methods:A novel ePRO questionnaire delivery system was developed by Software4Specialists in partnership with OPAL Rheumatology. Validated PRO questionnaires were sent from the patient’s electronic medical record (Audit4, Software4Specialists) and delivered to the patient’s email address at time intervals specified by the rheumatologist (defaults to quarterly) or completed in the clinic waiting room prior to the consultation using a tablet or the patient’s smart phone (in-practice). Completed questionnaires were encrypted and returned directly to the patient’s Audit4 electronic medical record held on the clinician’s server for review at the next clinical consultation. The link to the PRO questionnaire expired within 28 days if the questionnaire was not completed, and the questionnaires were automatically cancelled if 2 consecutive links expired. This technology was made available to up to 111 rheumatologists located in 42 clinics in 6 states/territories in Australia, and the use of this technology to furnish the clinical consultation was voluntary for clinicians and patients. Deidentified clinical data was extracted from the servers of participating rheumatologists and aggregated across all sites.1 Data collected between April 2016-Dec 2020 was analysed descriptively.Results:Between April 2016-Dec 2020, 99,505 FACIT-F, PHQ-2 and HCRU questionnaires have been delivered to 5,784 patients from 39 of 42 contributing clinics (93%). 85% of questionnaires were delivered via email and 15% in-practice. Overall, 85% of patients completed at least one questionnaire, and of all questionnaires sent, 73% were completed. These rates have remained consistent over time. The completion rates were higher when questionnaires were delivered to patients in-practice compared to email (96% vs 69%). Females were more likely to engage with the questionnaires than males (87% vs 81%), and older patients were slightly more likely to complete all questionnaires delivered. 69% of questionnaires sent via email were completed on the day they were delivered and 94% were completed within 7 days. The median (IQR) number of questionnaires completed per patient was 3 (1,7) and the median (IQR) time since the first questionnaire was completed was 13 months (5,26).Conclusion:The novel Audit4 ePRO delivery system is an effective tool for incorporating PROs into routine clinical care to capture data directly from the patient on the impact of their condition on their quality of life. The data generated provides a unique opportunity to understand the full burden of disease for patients in the real-world setting and the impact of interventions.References:[1]Littlejohn GO, Tymms KE, Smith T, Griffiths HT. Using big data from real-world Australian rheumatology encounters to enhance clinical care and research. Clin Exp Rheum 2020:38(5): 874 -880.Acknowledgements:The authors acknowledge the members of OPAL Rheumatology Ltd and their patients for providing clinical data for this study, and Software4Specialists Pty Ltd for providing the Audit4 platform.Disclosure of Interests:Kathleen Tymms: None declared, Tegan Smith: None declared, Claire Deakin: None declared, Tim Freeman: None declared, David Hoffman: None declared, Dana Segelov: None declared, Hedley Griffiths Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Novartis and Lilly., Sabina Ciciriello: None declared, Peter Youssef: None declared, David Mathers: None declared, Catherine OSullivan: None declared, Geoff Littlejohn Consultant of: Over the last 5 years Geoffrey Littlejohn has received educational grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Janssen, Sandoz, Sanofi and Seqirus


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredyth Grace Llewellyn Wilkinson ◽  
Wing Wu ◽  
Kathryn O’Brien ◽  
Claire T Deakin ◽  
Lucy R Wedderburn ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives This aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of how parents and carers feel about the effects and impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic lockdown and how this impacted upon their child/young person with JDM. Method We approached 139 participants from the JDM Cohort Biomarker Study (JDCBS), with specific consent to approach electronically for research studies. A secure electronic questionnaire with study introduction was sent to participants for their parents and carers around the UK to complete. It consisted of 20 questions about the impact of the pandemic on their child or young person’s clinical care. Data were analysed quantitatively and qualitatively. Results There were 76 (55%) responses to the survey. More than 50% of participants were actively being treated for their JDM at the point of survey completion as recorded by their parent or carer. More than 40% attested to disrupted treatment owing to COVID-19. The biggest impact upon clinical care was cancellation of appointments, initiating virtual appointments and extension of time between blood tests. Parents and carers expressed their own feelings of worry, concern and anxiety, but also those of their child or young person. Conclusion Families who have a child or young person with JDM have been affected by COVID-19. Qualitative comments highlight that it has been a very difficult time. Further investigation is required into this area and could be compared with research on the effects of COVID-19 on other patient groups with chronic disease.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document