scholarly journals Is it Possible to Implement a Rare Disease Case-Finding Tool in Primary Care? A UK-Based Pilot Study

Author(s):  
Orlando Buendia ◽  
Sneha Shankar ◽  
Hadley Mahon ◽  
Connor Toal ◽  
Lara Menzies ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction:This study implemented MendelScan, a primary care rare disease case-finding tool, into a UK National Health Service (NHS) population. Rare disease diagnosis is challenging due to disease complexity and low physician awareness. The 2021 UK Rare Diseases Framework highlights a global need for faster diagnosis to improve clinical outcomes as a key priority.Methods & Results:A UK primary care locality with 68,705 patients was examined. MendelScan encodes diagnostic/screening criteria for multiple rare diseases, mapping clinical terms to appropriate SNOMED CT codes (UK primary care standardised clinical terminology) to create digital algorithms. These algorithms were applied to a pseudo-anonymised structured data extract of the electronic health records (EHR) in this locality to "flag" at-risk patients who may require further evaluation. All flagged patients then underwent internal clinical review (a doctor reviewing each EHR flagged by the algorithm, removing all cases with a clear diagnosis that explains the clinical features that led to the patient being flagged); for those that passed this review, a report was returned to their GP. 55 of 76 disease criteria flagged at least one patient. 227 (0.33%) of the total 68,705 of EHR were flagged; 18 EHR were already diagnosed with the disease (The highlighted EHR has a diagnostic code for the same RD it was screened for. e.g Behcet’s disease algorithm identifying an EHR with a SNOMED CT code Behcet's disease). 75/227 (33%) EHR passed our internal review. Thirty-six reports were returned to the GP. Feedback was available for 28/36 of the reports sent. GP categorised nine reports as "Reasonable possible diagnosis" (advance for investigation), six reports as "diagnosis has already been excluded", ten reports as "patient has a clear alternative aetiology", and three reports as "Other" (patient left study locality, unable to re identify accurately). All the 9 cases considered as "reasonable possible diagnosis" had a further actionable evaluation.Conclusions:This pilot demonstrates that implementing such a tool is feasible at a population level. The case-finding tool identified credible cases which were subsequently referred for further investigation. Future work includes performance-based validation studies of diagnostic algorithms and the scalability of the tool.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orlando Buendia ◽  
Sneha Shankar ◽  
Hadley Mahon ◽  
Connor Toal ◽  
Lara Menzies ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction:This study implemented MendelScan, a primary care rare disease case-finding tool, into a UK NHS population. Rare disease diagnosis is challenging due to disease complexity and low physician awareness. The 2021 UK Rare Diseases Framework highlights a global need for faster diagnosis to improve clinical outcomes as a key priority.Methods & Results:A UK primary care locality with 68,705 patients was examined. MendelScan encodes diagnostic/screening criteria for multiple rare diseases, mapping clinical terms to appropriate SNOMED CT codes (UK primary care standardised clinical terminology) to create digital algorithms. These algorithms were applied to a pseudo-anonymised structured data extract of the electronic health records (EHR) in this locality to "flag" at-risk patients who may require further evaluation. All flagged patients then underwent internal clinical review; for those that passed this review, a report was returned to their GP. 55 of 76 disease criteria flagged at least one patient. 227 (0.33% of the total population) patients were flagged; 18 EHR were already diagnosed with the disease. 75/227 (33%) passed our internal review. Thirty-six reports were returned to the GP. Feedback was available for 28/36 of the reports sent. GP categorised nine reports as "Reasonable possible diagnosis" (advance for investigation), six reports as "diagnosis has already been excluded", ten reports as "patient has a clear alternative aetiology", and three reports as "Other" (patient left study locality, unable to reidentify accurately). All the 9 cases considered as "reasonable possible diagnosis" had a further actionable evaluation.Conclusions:This pilot demonstrates that implementing such a tool is feasible at a population level in an ethical, technical and efficient manner. The case-finding tool identified credible cases which were subsequently referred for further investigation. Future work includes performance-based validation studies of diagnostic algorithms and the scalability of the tool.


1993 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 87s
Author(s):  
SA. Papiris ◽  
M. Tympanidou ◽  
SH. Constantopoulos ◽  
HM. Moutsopoulos

Rheumatology ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 51 (7) ◽  
pp. 1216-1225 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Noel ◽  
M. Hutie ◽  
B. Wechsler ◽  
S. Vignes ◽  
D. Le Thi Huong-Boutin ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gulfer Okumus ◽  
Esen Kiyan ◽  
Fatih Selçuk Biricik ◽  
Ahmet Kaya Bilge ◽  
Sevil Kamalı ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Željka Kardum ◽  
Jasminka Milas Ahić ◽  
Ana Marija Lukinac ◽  
Ružica Ivelj ◽  
Višnja Prus

2005 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 645-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gülümser Aydın ◽  
Işık Keleş ◽  
Ebru Atalar ◽  
Sevim Orkun

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document