Efficient practices associated with diagnosis, treatment and management of fibromyalgia among primary care physicians

Physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding fibromyalgia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis, etiology, and optimal management of fibromyalgia remains contentious. This uncertainty may result in variability in clinical management. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies examining physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding fibromyalgia.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed from inception to February 2023 for cross-sectional surveys evaluating physicians' attitudes toward, and management of, fibromyalgia. Pairs of independent reviewers conducted article screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment in duplicate. We used random-effects meta-analysis to pool proportions for items reported by more than one study and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to summarize the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Of 864 citations, 21 studies (8904 participants) were eligible for review. Most physicians endorsed fibromyalgia as a distinct clinical entity (84%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74-92), and half (51%; 95% CI, 40-62) considered fibromyalgia a psychosocial condition. Knowledge of formal diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia was more likely among rheumatologists (69%, 95% CI, 45-89) versus general practitioners (38%, 95% CI, 24-54) (P = .04). Symptom relief was endorsed as the primary management goal by most physicians (73%, 95% CI, 52-90). Exercise, physiotherapy, antidepressants, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and non-opioid analgesics were most endorsed for management of fibromyalgia, but with wide variability between surveys. Opioids and most complementary and alternative interventions (e.g., homeopathy, chiropractic, and massage) received limited endorsement.

CONCLUSION

There is moderate certainty evidence to suggest that physicians are divided regarding whether fibromyalgia is a biomedical or psychosocial disorder. Physicians typically prioritize symptom relief as the primary goal of management, and often endorse management with exercise, non-opioid analgesics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antidepressants, and physiotherapy (moderate to high certainty evidence); however, important practice variation exists.

The current status of fibromyalgia in Korea: an electronic population health data study in Korea

Background

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a complex disorder characterized by widespread chronic pain and tenderness in the muscles, ligaments, and soft tissues. It is a chronic pain condition often accompanied by other symptoms and comorbidities. To effectively manage FM, it is crucial to obtain fundamental epidemiological data pertaining to the target population. Therefore, this study was conducted to elucidate the epidemiological characteristics of FM in the Korean population.

Methods

Population-based medical data of 51,276,314 subscribers to the National Health Insurance Service of Korea from 2014 to 2018 were used in this study.

Results

The overall incidence of FM ranged from 441 (2014) to 541 (2018) cases per 100,000 person-years, with a higher prevalence observed among female patients compared to male patients. The incidence gradually increased until middle age, followed by a decrease. The highest incidence rates were observed in the fifth decade of life for females and the sixth decade of life for males. When categorizing the affected parts of the body, the shoulder region was observed to be the most frequently affected. A comparison of the drug prescriptions based on medical specialty showed that antidepressants were the most commonly prescribed medications. The management of FM leads to consistent increases in medical expenses, regional disparities, and variations in prescription patterns across different medical specialties.

Conclusions

The findings of this study will not only contribute to the understanding of FM characteristics but also provide a vital foundation for efficient management of FM in Korea.

Frequency and characteristics of patient exclusion criteria in Canadian multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

A multidisciplinary approach is recommended for patients with complex chronic pain (CP). Many multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities (MTPFs) use patient exclusion criteria but little is known about their characteristics. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency and characteristics of exclusion criteria in public Canadian MTPFs.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in which we defined an MPTF as a clinic staffed with professionals from three disciplines or more (including at least one medical specialty) and whose services were integrated within the facility. We disseminated a web-based questionnaire in 2017-2018 to the administrative leads of MPTFs across the country. They were invited to complete the questionnaire about the characteristics of their facilities. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation measures.

RESULTS

A total of 87 MTPFs were included in the analyses. Half of them (52%) reported using three exclusion criteria or more. There was no significant association between the number of exclusion criteria and wait time for a first appointment or number of new consultations in the past year. Fibromyalgia and migraine were the most frequently excluded pain syndromes (10% and 7% of MPTFs, respectively). More than one MPTF out of four excluded patients with mental health disorders (30%) and/or substance use disorders (29%), including MPTFs with specialists in their staff.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary pain treatment facility exclusion criteria are most likely to affect CP patients living with complex pain issues and psychosocial vulnerabilities. Policy efforts are needed to support Canadian MPTFs in contributing to equitable access to pain management.

Implication of the Nociplastic Features for Clinical Diagnosis of Fibromyalgia: Development of the Preliminary Nociplastic-Based Fibromyalgia Features (NFF) Tool

OBJECTIVE

Nociplastic concept incorporates a broad continuum of pain phenotypes shared with clinical peculiarity. This study aimed to develop and validate a diagnostic tool, the preliminary Nociplastic-based Fibromyalgia Features (NFF), to detect fibromyalgia (FM) in patients with chronic pain.

METHODS

Items requiring yes or no responses and relating to the most relevant clinical nociplastic pain (NP) features of FM were compiled by a group of expert rheumatologists. The provisional list was tested in a prospective study on 185 consecutive patients with chronic pain (126 patients with FM and 59 patients with non-FM non-inflammatory chronic pain) diagnosed based on expert decision. Identification of the most discriminant combinations of items for FM and the calculation of their sensitivity and specificity were based on both univariate and multivariate (stepwise logistic regression) analyses. All participants were investigated through the final NFF, the 2011 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria, and the 2016 ACR criteria. NFF performance was assessed with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS

Based on multivariate analyses, we retained only seven items in the final version of the NFF. A cut-off score of 4 (corresponding to the number of positive items) gave the highest rate of correct identification of patients (85%), with a sensitivity of 82% and a specificity of 91%. The NFF showed the highest concordance rate with expert diagnosis (85%) and the lowest value (77%) with the ACR 2016 criteria.

CONCLUSION

The preliminary NFF with respect to the various aspects of NP showed good performance for detection of the FM in the clinical setting. This tool may provide a more pragmatic approach to the timely diagnosis of FM.

The Role of Nutrient Supplementation in the Management of Chronic Pain in Fibromyalgia: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

The multifaceted clinical presentation of fibromyalgia (FM) supports the modern understanding of the disorder as a more global condition than one simply affecting pain sensation. The main pharmacologic therapies used clinically include anti-epileptics and anti-depressants. Conservative treatment options include exercise, myofascial release, psychotherapy, and nutrient supplementation.

METHODS

Narrative review.

RESULTS

Nutrient supplementation is a broadly investigated treatment modality as numerous deficiencies have been linked to FM. Additionally, a proposed link between gut microbiome patterns and chronic pain syndromes has led to studies investigating probiotics as a possible treatment. Despite positive results, much of the current evidence regarding this topic is of poor quality, with variable study designs, limited sample sizes, and lack of control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The etiology of FM is complex, and has shown to be multi-factorial with genetics and environmental exposures lending influence into its development. Preliminary results are promising, however, much of the existing evidence regarding diet supplementation is of poor quality. Further, more robust studies are needed to fully elucidate the potential of this alternative therapeutic option.

Diagnostic difficulty, delayed diagnosis, and increased tendencies of surgical treatment in fibromyalgia syndrome

PURPOSE

Aimed to evaluate the time elapsed between the onset of early symptoms and the diagnosis of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS), the delays in diagnosis and frequent physician visits, increased tendencies of surgical treatment, and the effects of FMS symptoms on the post-surgical result.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

While there were 101 patients diagnosed with FMS in the 1st group, there were 100 patients in the 2nd group who presented with musculoskeletal complaints but were not diagnosed with FMS. In both groups, information on duration of complaints, time until diagnosis, and number of evaluating physicians were included. They were questioned in terms of whether they had undergone elective surgery before and after FMS diagnosis, and in terms of operation sites. Among these operations, the ones regarding the musculoskeletal system were evaluated, and the preoperative and postoperative, before and after FMS diagnosis.

RESULTS

It was determined that the diagnosis of FMS was made late; the number of doctor visits increased in the period until the diagnosis, and the rate of surgical treatment was higher than in patients without FMS. It was determined that the patients who were operated on after being diagnosed with FMS gained from the operation while the rate of gaining from surgery was lower in patients with FMS symptoms who were operated on before the diagnosis was made.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis of FMS reduces healthcare use, including referrals and examinations. Educating clinicians in the recognition and diagnosis of FMS will provide both patients and healthcare providers with benefits. Key Points • Early detection of FMS reduces healthcare utilization and expenditure, including referrals and examinations. • Educating clinicians in the recognition and diagnosis of FMS will provide both patients and healthcare providers with benefits. Therefore, it is important to understand why the diagnosis of FMS is made in a delayed manner. • Providing pragmatic tools to improve the methodology of primary care providers may help with diagnosing FMS accurately. • Early diagnosis and treatment of FMS may lead to a decrease in the number of operations and an improvement in the results of the operation.

Diagnostic Challenges and Management of Fibromyalgia

The World Health Organization regards chronic pain to be a public health concern. In clinical medicine, fibromyalgia (FM) is the most prevalent chronic widespread pain disease. In terms of impairment, consumption of health and social resources, and impact on primary and speciality care systems, it has reached worrisome proportions. This disease is frequently managed by primary care providers. Because of its intricacy, fibromyalgia diagnosis and treatment can be difficult. Fibromyalgia is a controversial condition. It might appear ill-defined in comparison to other pain conditions, with no clear knowledge of pathophysiology and hence no particular targeted therapy. This invariably sparks debates and challenges. There is no obvious cut-off point that distinguishes FM from non-FM. The diagnosis of fibromyalgia has been complicated by several factors, including patients' health-seeking behaviour, symptom identification, and physician labelling of the disease. Fibromyalgia is currently considered a centralized pain condition, according to research that has improved our understanding of its etiopathology. A multidisciplinary strategy combining pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies based on a biopsychosocial paradigm can result in effective therapy. Cultural and psychosocial variables appear to be a recent development in fibromyalgia, and they appear to have a larger influence on physician diagnosis than severe symptom levels in FM patients. Although physicians rely on FM criteria as the only way to classify FM patients in research and clinical settings, some crucial elements of the diagnostic challenge of fibromyalgia remain unsolved - invalidation, psychosocial variables, and diverse illness manifestation are some examples. Beyond the existing constructional scores, physicians' judgment gained in real communicative contexts with patients, appears to be the only dependable route for a more accurate diagnosis for fibromyalgia. We have performed an exhaustive review of the literature using the keywords "Fibromyalgia", "challenges" and "diagnosis" in PubMed and Google Scholar indexes up to September 2021. This article aims to examine the causes, diagnosis, and current treatment protocols of FM, as well as discuss some continuing debates and diagnostic challenges which physicians face in accurately diagnosing fibromyalgia.

Quality of rheumatology care for patients with fibromyalgia and chronic pain syndromes

BACKGROUND

One-third of primary care providers (PCPs) refer patients with fibromyalgia or chronic pain (FM/CP) to specialist care, typically rheumatology. Yet, comprehensive data on the quality of rheumatology care for patients with FM/CP are currently lacking.

METHODS

Records of patients referred for rheumatology consultation for FM/CP and seen at a single academic centre between 2017 and 2018 were extracted by retrospective chart review. Variables were diagnostic accuracy (at referral vs consultation), resource utilisation (investigations, medications, medical and allied health referral), direct costs (physician billing, staff salary, investigation fees) and access (consult wait time). Patient experience and referring PCP experience surveys were administered.

RESULTS

79 charts were identified. Following consultation, 81% of patients (n=64) maintained the same diagnosis of FM/CP, 19% (n=15) were diagnosed with regional pain and 0% of patients (n=0) were diagnosed with an inflammatory arthritis or connective tissue disease. Investigations were ordered for 37% of patients (n=29), medication prescribed for 10% (n=8) and an allied health referral provided for 54% (n=43). Direct costs totalled $19 745 (average $250/consult; range $157-$968/consult). Consultation wait time averaged 184 days (range 62-228 days). Out of the seven (64%) responses to the patient experience survey, 86% of patients (n=6) were satisfied with provider communication but the consultation 'definitely' met the expectations of only 57% (n=4). The PCP survey returned an insufficient response rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that no patient referred to rheumatology care for FM/CP was diagnosed with an inflammatory arthritis or connective tissue disease. Furthermore, patients with FM/CP experience lengthy wait times for rheumatology care which delay their management of chronic pain. Interdisciplinary and collaborative healthcare models can potentially provide higher quality care for patients with FM/CP.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Inpatient Multimodal Treatment Approach in Chronic Pain-Related Rheumatic Diseases

Introduction

Musculoskeletal disorders may cause chronic pain, which is associated with deterioration in physical well-being, functions, and quality of life. There are worldwide shortfalls in the care that is provided to the affected patients. Holistic, interdisciplinary care is rare. Monomodal therapeutic approaches dominate when health-care resources are scarce. In this study, we test the patient-relevant outcomes of multimodal treatment for rheumatic diseases that are associated with pain and check for remuneration.

Methods

We performed a retrospective data analysis of an inpatient multimodal treatment. The target parameter was the patient perspective, which we assessed by means of Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO). We applied the Visual Analogue Scale (mental and physical condition), the Heidelberg Short Early Risk Assessment Questionnaire, the Pain Disability Index, and the pain grading according to Kohlmann/Raspe (N = 375 patients). We also investigated compensation for inpatient treatments with and without multimodal treatments. Moreover, we compared Diagnosis-Related Group remuneration with and without complex treatment.

Results

After implementing a multimodal treatment, improved mental (mood) status was significantly better (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, P < . 001), despite high levels of pain (Kohlmann/Raspe) reported on admission. Apart from the underlying rheumatic disease, 111 patients also reported chronic back pain, which was improved following the treatment (t test, P < . 001). Subjective impairments associated with pain were significantly lower at the end of the hospital stay (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, P < . 001). Compensation for inpatient treatments with multimodal treatments increased noticeably in German hospitals in 2016 to 2019, while remunerations for monomodal treatments show mixed results.

Conclusion

PROs regarding mood, pain, and perceived impairments improved following the multimodal complex treatment. Compensation of hospitals should take into account additional performance requirements of holistic treatments, whereby the promotion and further studies of PROs are recommended.

"No one wants to look after the fibro patient". Understanding models, and patient perspectives, of care for fibromyalgia: reviews of current evidence

Fibromyalgia is a common and complex long-term pain condition. Despite advancements in our understanding and treatment of fibromyalgia, patients report patchy health care provision and frustrating journeys through the health care system. To inform how best to deliver care, we undertook 2 narrative reviews examining existing evidence on (1) models of care for fibromyalgia and (2) patients' experiences, preferences, and unmet needs regarding their health care. Seven databases were systematically searched. Quantitative data was narratively synthesised and qualitative data thematically analysed. No evidence-based model of care covering the patient journey through the entire health care system was identified. Limited evidence suggests no clear benefit for ongoing care in secondary care settings. Patients with fibromyalgia report difficult interactions with the health care system that might equally be expressed by those with other long-term conditions, such as inconsistent and poorly coordinated care. However, they also face unique problems; fibromyalgia was often not viewed as a real condition, resulting in difficult encounters with health care staff, in particular not feeling believed or listened to. Significant delays in diagnosis were commonplace. Positive care experiences such as being listened to and shared decision-making made patients feeling better informed, well supported, and more satisfied. There is little evidence to inform how best to organise health care for patients with fibromyalgia and ensure care is delivered in a coordinated and consistent way. These findings provide a strong rationale for developing a new model of care for fibromyalgia.

[Beliefs and perceptions of the diagnosis and treatment of fibromyalgia in a group of rehabilitation and physical medicine specialists in Colombia]

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia is a chronic disease characterised by the presence of musculoskeletal pain, usually associated with other symptoms, including depression, fatigue, and sleep disorders. There is no objective information on the beliefs and perceptions of the diagnosis and treatment of fibromyalgia among rehabilitation and physical medicine specialists. The aim of this study was to describe these beliefs and perceptions among a group of physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists in Colombia.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional study. A focus group was held with the participation of 2 rheumatologists, one physical medicine and rehabilitation specialist and an expert in qualitative research. The group designed a survey to assess the beliefs and perceptions of physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists of the diagnosis and treatment of fibromyalgia. The self-administered, anonymous questionnaire was completed during meetings of the Colombian Association of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 99 physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists. Of these, 17.1% (n=17) believed there was insufficient evidence to consider fibromyalgia a disease, 86.8% (n=86) used the ACR 1990 criteria to diagnose patients with fibromyalgia, and 33.3% (n=33) used the criteria of the 2010 classification. The most commonly used drugs for the management of fibromyalgia were antidepressants, prescribed by 84.8% of the surveyed physicians, followed by analgesics (75.7%) and anticonvulsants (66.6%). Concerning multidisciplinary management, 50.6% referred these patients to a rheumatologist and 40.7% to a psychiatrist. In all, 77.2% of rehabilitation specialists believed that patients with fibromyalgia should be managed by their specialty.

CONCLUSION

This study provides information on perceptions of the diagnosis and treatment of fibromyalgia among a group of Colombian rehabilitation specialists and found frequent use of the ACR 1990 classification. Among these physicians, the use of drugs, especially antidepressants and analgesics, was high. Most believed that patients with fibromyalgia should be treated by rehabilitation specialists.

Diagnosis of fibromyalgia: comparison of the 2011/2016 ACR and AAPT criteria and validation of the modified Fibromyalgia Assessment Status

Objective

To compare the concordance of the three diagnostic criteria, respectively the 2011 ACR criteria (ACR 2011 Cr), the ACR 2016 criteria (ACR 2016 Cr) and the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION)-APS Pain Taxonomy criteria (AAPT Cr), and to explore the performance of an additional set of criteria, the modified Fibromyalgia Assessment Status (FAS 2019 modCr), in the diagnosis of FM syndrome.

Methods

Consecutive patients with chronic widespread pain, referred by the primary care setting, underwent rheumatologic assessment that established the presence or not of FM and were investigated through the four sets of proposed criteria. For the FAS 2019 modCr, discriminant validity to distinguish patients with FM and non-FM was assessed with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

Results

A total of 732 (405 with FM and 327 with other common chronic pain problems) patients were evaluated. Against the clinical diagnosis of FM, the sensitivity, specificity and correct classification were, respectively: 79.8, 91.7 and 85.1% for ACR 2011 Cr; 78, 90.5 and 83.6% for the ACR 2016 Cr; and 73.8, 91.7 and 81.8% for the AAPT Cr. The alternative set, proposed on the FAS 2019 modCr, provided a maximal diagnostic accuracy with a score ≥20 (Youden’s index), with a sensitivity of 84.2%, specificity 89.0% and positive likelihood ratio 7.65.

Conclusion

There is a considerable agreement between criteria-based diagnoses of FM, although the AAPT Cr perform least well in terms of percentage of correct classification. The FAS 2019 modCr had comparable characteristics.

"Everyone thinks I am just lazy": Legitimacy narratives of Americans suffering from fibromyalgia

This qualitative study reflects an analysis of 50 stories told by Americans living with fibromyalgia, a chronic condition marked by widespread physical pain. Stories were randomly collected from The Experience Project, an online public forum, and analyzed using the communication theory of identity as a guiding framework. Thematic analysis was used to examine how the legitimacy narratives of people with fibromyalgia respond to the American discourse of hard work. Three narrative themes emerged from the data: The Personal Experience of Living With Fibromyalgia (personal layer of identity), the Struggle to Complete Everyday and Professional Tasks (enacted layer of identity), and a Limited Ability to Perform Gender Roles (relational layer of identity). Throughout their stories, individuals with FM strive to legitimate their condition and contest the notion that they are lazy. Stories reveal that people suffering from fibromyalgia experience significant personal (e.g. cleaning the house) and professional (e.g. extended sick leave) challenges, as well as serious relational challenges that are often tied to gender roles (e.g. being a good mother). Results provide a variety of implications and directions for future research.

Fibromyalgia in Primary Care

Fibromyalgia is a common disorder and has substantial impact on quality of life. The cause remains unknown, but current evidence points to multifactorial involvement of pain processing. Clinical diagnosis is aided by evidence-based diagnostic criteria with subscores for widespread pain and symptom severity. Nonpharmacologic treatments, including cognitive behavioral therapy, sleep hygiene, and regular aerobic exercise, form the cornerstone of management. Pharmacologic intervention is an important adjunct, but benefit is variable. There is no cure for fibromyalgia at this time, but persistence and patience in management may lead to a satisfactory lifestyle.

A meta-ethnography of health-care professionals’ experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain to improve the experience and quality of health care

Background

People with chronic pain do not always feel that they are being listened to or valued by health-care professionals (HCPs). We aimed to understand and improve this experience by finding out what HCPs feel about providing health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain. We did this by bringing together the published qualitative research.

Objectives

(1) To undertake a qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) to increase our understanding of what it is like for HCPs to provide health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain; (2) to make our findings easily available and accessible through a short film; and (3) to contribute to the development of methods for QESs.

Design

We used the methods of meta-ethnography, which involve identifying concepts and progressively abstracting these concepts into a line of argument.

Data sources

We searched five electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) from inception to November 2016. We included studies that explored HCPs’ experiences of providing health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain. We utilised the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) framework to rate our confidence in the findings.

Results

We screened 954 abstracts and 184 full texts and included 77 studies reporting the experiences of > 1551 HCPs. We identified six themes: (1) a sceptical cultural lens and the siren song of diagnosis; (2) navigating juxtaposed models of medicine; (3) navigating the patient–clinician borderland; (4) the challenge of dual advocacy; (5) personal costs; and (6) the craft of pain management. We produced a short film, ‘Struggling to support people to live a valued life with chronic pain’, which presents these themes (seeReport Supplementary Material 1; URL:www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hsdr/1419807/#/documentation; accessed 24 July 2017). We rated our confidence in the review findings using the GRADE-CERQual domains. We developed a conceptual model to explain the complexity of providing health care to people with chronic non-malignant pain. The innovation of this model is to propose a series of tensions that are integral to the experience: a dualistic biomedical model compared with an embodied psychosocial model; professional distance compared with proximity; professional expertise compared with patient empowerment; the need to make concessions to maintain therapeutic relationships compared with the need for evidence-based utility; and patient advocacy compared with health-care system advocacy.

Limitations

There are no agreed methods for determining confidence in QESs.

Conclusions

We highlight areas that help us to understand why the experience of health care can be difficult for patients and HCPs. Importantly, HCPs can find it challenging if they are unable to find a diagnosis and at times this can make them feel sceptical. The findings suggest that HCPs find it difficult to balance their dual role of maintaining a good relationship with the patient and representing the health-care system. The ability to support patients to live a valued life with pain is described as a craft learnt through experience. Finally, like their patients, HCPs can experience a sense of loss because they cannot solve the problem of pain.

Future work

Future work to explore the usefulness of the conceptual model and film in clinical education would add value to this study. There is limited primary research that explores HCPs’ experiences with chronic non-malignant pain in diverse ethnic groups, in gender-specific contexts and in older people living in the community.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Improving the quality of care and patient experience of care during the diagnosis of lupus: a qualitative study of primary care

Purpose To better understand diagnostic delay and doctor-patient communication during the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematous in patients without malar rash, we conducted a qualitative study of primary care providers' perceptions. Methods We conducted in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of eight primary care physicians in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Telephone interviews were recorded, transcribed, reviewed, and coded for domains and themes. Results We identified five domains related to diagnosis: initial assessment and tests, initial diagnosis and empiric treatment, timeliness of diagnosis, communicating with the patient, and opportunities for improvement. In the absence of malar rash, the lupus manifestations are common while the disease is rare. Once the primary care provider believes that the disease may be autoimmune, they work with a rheumatologist, but this could take months. Initially, the physician assesses whether the condition is self-limiting or responds to empiric treatments. Over time, as empiric treatments fail or additional lupus manifestations emerge, the primary care provider makes a referral. Doctor-patient communication is critical to help the physician make sense of the symptoms, maintain trust, and assure the patient that he or she is receiving appropriate care. Patient persistence and communication are critically important. Continuing education was deemed essential by each physician. Conclusion In the absence of malar rash, a lupus diagnosis can be difficult. Enhanced doctor-patient communication, patient persistence, physician access to rheumatology and continuing education of primary care might improve time to diagnosis and the patient's experience with primary care. This knowledge is transferable to other rare, complex diseases.

A simple screening test to recognize fibromyalgia in primary care patients with chronic pain

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Primary care providers are increasingly expected to recognize and treat fibromyalgia (FM) without significant interaction with rheumatologists. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential usefulness of 3 simple measures (tenderness to digital pressure, BP cuff-evoked pain, and a single patient question) as a screening test for possible FM in a patient with chronic pain.

METHODS

A total of 352 patients (mean age 50 ± 16.3 years, 70% female) scheduled for routine examination in 2 primary care practices were studied. They were comprised of 52 patients (14.8%) who carried a chart diagnosis of FM, 108 (30.7%) with chronic pain but not FM, and 192 who had neither pain nor FM (54.5%). Subjects were assessed for tenderness to digital pressure at 10 locations, BP cuff-evoked pain, and a single question, "I have a persistent deep aching over most of my body" (0-10).

RESULTS

FM patients endorsed the single deep ache question substantially more than those with chronic pain but without FM (7.4 ± 2.9 vs 3.2 ± 3.4; P < .0001) and exhibited greater bilateral digital evoked tenderness (6.1 ± 3.1 vs 2.4 ± 2.4, P < 0.0001), and BP-evoked pressure pain (132.6 mmHg ±45.5 vs 169.2 mmHg ±48.0, P < 0.0001). However, on multivariate logistic regressions, the BP cuff-evoked pain became non-significant. On further analyses, a useful screening test was provided by: (1) pain on pinching the Achilles tendon at 4 kg/pressure over 4 seconds, and (2) and positive endorsement of the question "I have a persistent deep aching over most of my body".

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that 2 tests, taking less than 1 minute, can indicate a probable diagnosis of FM in a chronic pain patient. In the case of a positive screen, a follow-up examination is required for confirmation or refutation.

Meta-ethnography to understand healthcare professionals' experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to explore healthcare professionals' experience of treating chronic non-malignant pain by conducting a qualitative evidence synthesis. Understanding this experience from the perspective of healthcare professionals will contribute to improvements in the provision of care.

DESIGN

Qualitative evidence synthesis using meta-ethnography. We searched five electronic bibliographic databases from inception to November 2016. We included studies that explore healthcare professionals' experience of treating adults with chronic non-malignant pain. We used the GRADE-CERQual framework to rate confidence in review findings.

RESULTS

We screened the 954 abstracts and 184 full texts and included 77 published studies reporting the experiences of over 1551 international healthcare professionals including doctors, nurses and other health professionals. We abstracted six themes: (1) a sceptical cultural lens, (2) navigating juxtaposed models of medicine, (3) navigating the geography between patient and clinician, (4) challenge of dual advocacy, (5) personal costs and (6) the craft of pain management. We rated confidence in review findings as moderate to high.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first qualitative evidence synthesis of healthcare professionals' experiences of treating people with chronic non-malignant pain. We have presented a model that we developed to help healthcare professionals to understand, think about and modify their experiences of treating patients with chronic pain. Our findings highlight scepticism about chronic pain that might explain why patients feel they are not believed. Findings also indicate a dualism in the biopsychosocial model and the complexity of navigating therapeutic relationships. Our model may be transferable to other patient groups or situations.

Normalizing fibromyalgia as a chronic illness

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a complex chronic disease that affects 3-10% of the general adult population and is principally characterized by widespread pain, and is often associated with disrupted sleep, fatigue, and comorbidities, among other symptoms. There are many gaps in our knowledge of FM, such that, compared with other chronic illnesses including diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, and asthma, it is far behind in terms of provider understanding and therapeutic approaches. The experience that healthcare professionals (HCPs) historically gained in developing approaches to manage and treat patients with these chronic illnesses may help show how they can address similar problems in patients with FM. In this review, we examine some of the issues around the management and treatment of FM, and discuss how HCPs can implement appropriate strategies for the benefit of patients with FM. These issues include understanding that FM is a legitimate condition, the benefits of prompt diagnosis, use of non-drug and pharmacotherapies, patient and HCP education, watchful waiting, and assessing patients by FM domain so as not to focus exclusively on one symptom to the detriment of others. Developing successful approaches is of particular importance for HCPs in the primary care setting who are in the ideal position to provide long-term care for patients with FM. In this way, FM may be normalized as a chronic illness to the benefit of both patients and HCPs.

Perspectives on Living With Fibromyalgia

Perceptions of people living with chronic illness change over time, contributing to health-related stress that necessitates coping skills. Paterson's shifting perspectives model provides an explanation of chronically ill people's variations in attention to their symptoms. In this qualitative study, 20 people with fibromyalgia living in a rural setting were interviewed in 2013 with the aim of gaining insight into their experiences and the meaning-making associated with their chronic condition. Analysis of the interview data categorized five recurrent, or common, themes: experiences of loss, feelings of fear and uncertainty, influence of stress, stigmatization of the disease, and coping through courage. Difficulties attendant to losses, distress, and stigma associated with this chronic condition led the participants to report poor health-related quality of life. The study findings can be useful across clinical settings to nurses and other health care providers in understanding those diagnosed with fibromyalgia and their care needs.

Fibromyalgia: management strategies for primary care providers

AIMS

Fibromyalgia (FM), a chronic disorder defined by widespread pain, often accompanied by fatigue and sleep disturbance, affects up to one in 20 patients in primary care. Although most patients with FM are managed in primary care, diagnosis and treatment continue to present a challenge, and patients are often referred to specialists. Furthermore, the lack of a clear patient pathway often results in patients being passed from specialist to specialist, exhaustive investigations, prescription of multiple drugs to treat different symptoms, delays in diagnosis, increased disability and increased healthcare resource utilisation. We will discuss the current and evolving understanding of FM, and recommend improvements in the management and treatment of FM, highlighting the role of the primary care physician, and the place of the medical home in FM management.

METHODS

We reviewed the epidemiology, pathophysiology and management of FM by searching PubMed and references from relevant articles, and selected articles on the basis of quality, relevance to the illness and importance in illustrating current management pathways and the potential for future improvements.

RESULTS

The implementation of a framework for chronic pain management in primary care would limit unnecessary, time-consuming, and costly tests, reduce diagnostic delay and improve patient outcomes.

DISCUSSION

The patient-centred medical home (PCMH), a management framework that has been successfully implemented in other chronic diseases, might improve the care of patients with FM in primary care, by bringing together a team of professionals with a range of skills and training.

CONCLUSION

Although there remain several barriers to overcome, implementation of a PCMH would allow patients with FM, like those with other chronic conditions, to be successfully managed in the primary care setting.