Is there evidence to support multidisciplinary healthcare working in rheumatology? A systematic review of the literature

Personalised care packages for people with rheumatoid arthritis: a mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVES

Disease management in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) requires holistic assessment. We aimed to design personalised care packages suitable for people with RA.

METHODS

This study was conducted using a mixed-methods approach and exploratory sequential design. Consensus workshops were held, involving people with RA and healthcare professionals (HCPs) treating them. Subsequently, an online survey sought views on future care packages for people with RA at relevant disease progression/stages, based on (1) results from previous quantitative data analyses (eg, socioeconomic/clinical factors), and (2) themes identified during workshops.

RESULTS

Two conceptual care pathways were identified: (1) around the time of RA diagnosis, an early opportunity to influence the disease course; (2) for individuals with established RA, emphasising the importance of 'the right MDT member at the right time'.Three care packages were suggested: (1) early care package (around RA diagnosis): introduction to MDT; (2) continuity of care package (established RA): primary/secondary providers; and (3) personalised holistic care package: integral to packages 1 and 2, implemented alongside allied health professionals.The survey received 41 responses; 82.9% agreed that people with RA need a consistent 'early care package' at diagnosis. 85.4% approved of additional care packages tailored to individuals' clinical, psychological and social needs when moving to different stages of their long-term disease. Fleiss' Kappa calculations demonstrated fair level of agreement among respondents.

CONCLUSION

Two care pathways, with three tailored care packages, were identified, with potential to improve management of people with RA. Future research will help to determine if such care packages can impact clinical (including patient-reported) outcomes.

The impact of introducing multidisciplinary care assessments on access to rheumatology care in British Columbia: an interrupted time series analysis

Background

In 2011 the British Columbia (BC) Ministry of Health introduced a new fee-for-service billing code that allowed “Multidisciplinary Care Assessment” (MCA). This change has the potential to change access to and quality of care for patients. This study aimed to explore the impact on access to rheumatology services in the province.

Methods

Fee-for-service rheumatology billings were evaluated for each rheumatologist 2 years before and after use of the MCA code. Numbers of 1) unique patients and 2) services provided per month were used as proxy measures of access to care. A multiple-baseline interrupted time series model assessed the impact of the MCA on levels and trends of the access outcomes.

Results

Our analysis consisted of 82,360 patients cared for by 26 rheumatologists who billed for an MCA. In our primary analysis we observed a sustained increase in the mean number of unique patients of 4.9% (95% CI: 0.0% to 9.9%, p = 0.049) and the mean number of services of 7.1% (95% CI: 1.0% to 13.6%, (p = 0.021), per month provided by a rheumatologist, corresponding to the initial use of MCA.

Conclusion

The introduction of the MCA code was associated with an initial increase in the measures of access, which was maintained but did not increase over time. Our study suggests that the use of Multidisciplinary Care Assessment can contribute to expanding and/or sustaining access to care for people with complex chronic conditions, like rheumatic diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07715-x.

Multidisciplinary working in the management of axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis

Multidisciplinary (MD) care is essential in the management of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) and is one of the main pillars of disease management and patient care. However, evidence supporting the effectiveness and benefits of this strategy in SpA is scarce. In this review we discuss the three types of MD care models: (i) combined clinics (MD units), including ‘face to face’, ‘parallel’ and ‘circuit approach’ clinics; (ii) MD team meetings; (iii) group consultations. The most frequently used model in SpA studies has been the ‘parallel’ combined clinic and usually encompasses a rheumatologist and another specialist, most commonly a dermatologist or a gastroenterologist, that work in tandem according to predefined referral criteria and treatment algorithms. MD working seems to improve the care of patients with SpA by a better identification and diagnosis of the disease, an earlier and more comprehensive treatment approach, and better outcomes for patients in terms of disease activity, physical function, quality of life and patient satisfaction. Nevertheless, challenges remain. Data on effectiveness and feasibility are scarce and are mostly derived from studies with design issues and often without a unidisciplinary care comparator arm. Although patient centricity is one of the core values of patient care and MD setting in SpA, the patient often does not play an active role in most of the MD settings studied or in common clinical practice. Further efforts should be made so that MD care reflects patients’ expectations and needs. Overcoming these limits will help to implement successfully SpA MD care in daily clinical practice and subsequently to achieve a higher quality of care for our patients.

A categorisation of problems and solutions to improve patient referrals from primary to specialty care

BACKGROUND

Improving access to specialty care has been identified as a critical issue in the delivery of health services, especially given an increasing burden of chronic disease. Identifying and addressing problems that impact access to specialty care for patients referred to speciality care for non-emergent procedures and how these deficiencies can be managed via health system delivery interventions is important to improve care for patients with chronic conditions. However, the primary-specialty care interface is complex and may be impacted by a variety of potential health services delivery deficiencies; with an equal range of interventions developed to correct them. Consequently, the literature is also diverse and difficult to navigate. We present a narrative review to identify existing literature, and provide a conceptual map that categorizes problems at the primary-specialty care interface with linkages to corresponding interventions aimed at ensuring that patient transitions across the primary-specialty care interface are necessary, appropriate, timely and well communicated.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from January 1, 2005 until Dec 31, 2014, grey literature and reference lists to identify articles that report on interventions implemented to improve the primary-specialty care interface. Selected articles were categorized to describe: 1) the intervention context, including the deficiency addressed, and the objective of the intervention 2) intervention activities, and 3) intervention outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 106 articles, producing four categories of health services delivery deficiencies based in: 1) clinical decision making; 2) information management; 3) the system level management of patient flows between primary and secondary care; and 4) quality-of-care monitoring. Interventions were divided into seven categories and fourteen sub-categories based on the deficiencies addressed and the intervention strategies used. Potential synergies and trade-offs among interventions are discussed. Little evidence exists regarding the synergistic and antagonistic interactions of alternative intervention strategies.

CONCLUSION

The categorization acts as an aid in identifying why the primary-specialty care interface may be failing and which interventions may produce improvements. Overlap and interconnectedness between interventions creates potential synergies and conflicts among co-implemented interventions.

Multidisciplinary Management of Spondyloarthritis-Related Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease

Introduction

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are chronic autoimmune conditions that share common pathophysiologic mechanisms. The optimal management of patients with IMIDs remains challenging because the coexistence of different conditions requires the intervention of several specialists. The aim of this study was to develop a series of statements defining overarching principles that guide the implementation of a multidisciplinary approach for the management of spondyloarthritis (SpA)-related IMIDs including SpA, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and uveitis.

Methods

A Delphi consensus-based approach was used to identify a core set of statements. The process included development of initial questions by a steering committee, an exhaustive search of the literature using complementary approaches to identify potential statements and two Delphi voting rounds for finalization of the statements.

Results

Consensus was achieved on the related nature of IMIDs, the existence of a high prevalence of multiple IMIDs in a single patient and the fact that a multidisciplinary approach can result in a more extensive evaluation and comprehensive approach to treatment. The goals of a multidisciplinary team should be to increase diagnosis of concomitant IMIDs, improve the decision-making process, and increase patient satisfaction and adherence. Early referral and diagnosis, early recognition of concomitant IMIDs and optimizing treatment to improve patient quality of life are some of the advantages of using multidisciplinary teams. To be effective, a multidisciplinary team should be equipped with the appropriate tools for diagnosis and follow-up, and at a minimum the multidisciplinary team should include a dermatologist, gastroenterologist and rheumatologist; providing psychologic support via a psychologist and involving an ophthalmologist, general practitioners and nurses in multidisciplinary care is also important.

Conclusion

The present Delphi consensus identified a set of overarching principles that may be useful for implementation of a multidisciplinary approach for the management of SpA-related IMIDs.

Funding

Aristea and Hippocrates.

Perspectives of Medical Specialists From Different Disciplines on the Management of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: An Interview Study

OBJECTIVE

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a complex autoimmune disease that can affect multiple organ systems, with specialists from many disciplines often involved, which may lead to inconsistent care. We aimed to describe the attitudes and perspectives of specialists from different medical disciplines on the management of people with SLE.

METHODS

Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted with rheumatologists (n = 16), nephrologists (n = 16), and immunologists (n = 11) providing care to adults with SLE from 19 centers across Australia in 2015. All interviews were transcribed and analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: uncertainties in judgments (hampered by unknown and unclear etiology, inapplicable evidence, comprehending information dispersion), reflexive responses (anchoring to specialty training, anticipating outcomes, avoiding disaster, empathy for the vulnerable), overarching duty to patients (achieving patient priorities, maximizing adherence, controlling the disease, providing legitimate information, having adequate and relevant expertise), safeguarding professional opportunities (diversifying clinical skills, protecting colleagues' interests), and optimizing access to treatment (capitalizing on multidisciplinary care, acquiring breakthrough therapies).

CONCLUSION

Specialists strive to deliver evidence-informed patient-centered care, but recognize that they are anchored by their training. To overcome uncertainties in clinical management due to lack of high-quality evidence and specialty silo structures, specialists translated evidence from other disease settings and collaborated with other specialists in routine care. Developing robust evidence, tools to support evidence-informed decisions, and multidisciplinary shared-care pathways may improve the management of people with this complex disease.

Rehabilitation needs approached by health professionals at a rheumatism hospital

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to examine the characteristics of patients referred to occupational therapists (OTs), physiotherapists (PTs) and social workers (SWs) at a rehabilitation unit in a hospital specializing in rheumatology, and the rehabilitation needs that clinicians and patients agreed should be addressed in the encounters with the particular health professional groups.

METHODS

Consecutive hospitalized patients at a rheumatism hospital were recruited by the health professionals. Questions about patient characteristics and rehabilitation needs were posed. Free-text responses to questions about rehabilitation needs were coded by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF).

RESULTS

The patients varied considerably in age distribution, disease duration, disability level and diagnoses, and several patients had comorbidities. The rehabilitation needs classified under the component Body Function fell into the chapters: Sensory Functions and Pain (PTs), Functions of Cardiovascular System (PTs), Neuromusculoskeletal and Movement-Related Functions (OTs, PTs); under the Activity and Participation component, these were: General Tasks and Demands (OTs), Mobility (OTs), Self-Care (PTs), Interpersonal Interactions and Relationships (SWs) and Major Life Stress (SWs); and under the Environmental Factors component these were: Products and Technology (OTs) and Services, Systems and Politics (SWs).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients were fairly heterogeneous. The needs identified in the encounters with the different professional groups fell into all three components of the ICF, and there was only a minor overlap between the health professionals at the chapter level of the ICF.

Categorisation of foot complaints in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) from a New Zealand cohort

Background

Foot complaints have been shown to be common in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and heterogeneous in nature. We aimed to categorize self-reported foot complaints in people with SLE and foot symptoms.

Methods

A self-administered validated questionnaire was posted to 406 people with SLE attending adult rheumatology clinics across three health boards in Auckland, New Zealand. In addition to foot pain, vascular complaints, dermatological lesions and neurological symptoms were included in the analysis. Pairwise correlations among the variables were undertaken followed by factor analysis to identify and categorise associations between reported foot complaints.

Results

From the questionnaires returned, 93 full datasets were analysed. Participants’ were predominantly female (n = 87, 93.7%), with mean (SD) age of 50.4 (14.3) years and a mean (SD) disease duration of 13.1 (11) years. Three categories of foot complaint were determined: ‘foot pain’, ‘skin disorders’ and ‘vascular insufficiency’. These three groups provided the best fit (0.91) to describe the wide range of foot complaints reported by those with SLE. Factor analysis for foot pain demonstrated a high positive loading for the inter-correlation of foot pain in past month (0.83), foot pain today (0.71), intermittent claudication (0.71), numbness (0.62), loss of balance (0.81), swelling (0.59), foot joint pain (0.77), arch pain (0.68) and tendon pain (0.77). Skin disorders demonstrated a very high positive loading for 3 factors skin rash (0.82), blistering skin rash (0.95) and foot ulceration (0.88). In vascular insufficiency a high positive loading for cold feet (0.83), chilblains (0.76) and Raynaud’s phenomenon (0.70).

Conclusions

This work suggests people with SLE report three independent categories of foot complaints; foot pain, skin disorders or vascular insufficiency.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13047-017-0217-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Multidisciplinary team care for people with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of multidisciplinary team (MDT) care for the management of disability, disease activity and quality of life (QoL) in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Data sources identified published (MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, CENTRAL) and unpublished (OpenGrey) literature. Independent data extraction and quality assessment, using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, were conducted by two reviewers. The primary outcome was change in disability at 12 months; secondary outcomes included disability at other time points and disease activity and QoL at 12 months. Where possible, the pooled effect sizes were calculated for inpatient or outpatient MDT interventions. Four hundred and fifteen studies were retrieved. Twelve manuscripts, which reported 10 RCTs, representing 1147 participants were included. Only data from five high- or moderate-quality trials were pooled according to clinical setting. There was no difference in disability between inpatient MDT care and any comparison group [mean difference (95% confidence intervals) 0.04, -0.13 to 0.20] or between outpatient MDT care and comparison groups (0.09, -0.07 to 0.25) at 12 months. There was no difference in disability at 2 years or <12 months or disease activity and QoL at 12 months between MDT care and any comparison group. There is limited evidence evaluating the effect of MDT care on disability, disease activity or QoL in people with RA. There is likely to be no effect of MDT care on disability at 12 months or other time points.