[Rheumatological care in the Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet Rheumatism Center-a model for conurbations]

[How many patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases have the technical prerequisites for video consultations and are also willing to use this to carry out visits by medical specialist visits?]

BACKGROUND

The currently disseminating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and limited capacities in outpatient rheumatological care, pose questions about possible alternatives to clinical visits, also in view of the digital revolution. It is unclear whether and to what extent patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases are willing and in a position to deal with the new media, such as video consultation.

METHODS

In the middle of the pandemic in May 2020 outpatients were surveyed using a standardized questionnaire in order to document their possibilities and willingness to participate in a video consultation. The treating physicians were asked whether carrying out a video consultation was considered to be a possible and meaningful option.

RESULTS

Overall, 232 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases were surveyed (64.7% female, average age 54.0 ± 15.2 years), seropositive (n = 58) and seronegative (n = 51) rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA, n = 77) including axial SpA (axSpA) and psoriatic arthropathy (PsA) as well as collagenosis and vasculitis (CoV, n = 46). The mean duration of disease was 5.5 ± 8.2 years, whereby in 75 patients (32.3%) it was the first diagnosis. The mean disease activity (0-10, subjective patient self-estimation) was 4.7 ± 2.5. Overall, 176 patients were basically aware of the possibility to carry out video consultations (75.9%) and 166 considered that they were technically capable to participate (71.6%) but only 131 were principally willing to participate (56.5%). Logistic regression analyses showed that the willingness to participate in video consultations decreased with increasing age (β = 0.28, p = 0.01). According to the medical estimation video consultations were thought to be principally possible for 161 patients for technical reasons (69.4%) and for 127 for medical reasons (54.7%); however, a video consultation within the framework of treatment was only considered to be meaningful by the physician for 76 patients (32.8%).

CONCLUSION

Not all patients can or want to participate in video consultations and the willingness declines with increasing age. The estimation of the meaningfulness of video consultations by physicians was also limited to approximately one third of the patients surveyed. This must be taken into consideration for the future planning of video consultations.