A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Treat-to-Target Approach in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Quality Improvement Trial. | LitMetric

Objective: Using a quality improvement approach, our objective was to integrate a treat-to-target approach for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through routine electronic collection of patient-reported disease activity scores and a multidisciplinary learning collaborative for rheumatologists.

Methods: RA patients completed a patient-reported outcome measure, the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), at check-in. Nine rheumatologists and their patients were allocated to a learning collaborative intervention group focused on a treat-to-target approach and 13 were allocated to a control group. The primary outcome was documentation of a treat-to-target implementation score: disease activity score, disease activity score used in the medication change decision, the presence of a treatment target, and an indication of shared decision-making. A primary analysis of patient visits with medication changes was conducted using an interrupted time-series analysis.

Results: We studied 554 individual rheumatology patients with 709 patient visits. Treat-to-target implementation scores among intervention rheumatologists (mean ± SD 44.6% ± 1.63%) were 12.4% higher than in the control group (mean ± SD 32.2% ± 1.50%; P < 0.0001). We observed differences in treat-to-target implementation score components, comparing intervention group to control group rheumatologists: disease activity score present, 77.2% versus 68.0% (P = 0.02); disease activity score used in the medication change decision, 45.2% versus 30.0% (P < 0.01); treatment target, 9.0% versus 0.4% (P < 0.01); and shared decision-making, 46.9% versus 30.0% (P < 0.01). Secondary analysis of patient visits with high RAPID3 scores found that medication changes were 54% less likely in the intervention versus control group (odds ratio 0.46 [95% confidence interval 0.27-0.79], P = 0.005).

Conclusion: This nonrandomized, interrupted time-series trial demonstrated a modest but significant impact of a learning collaborative intervention on rheumatologist documentation of a treat-to-target approach in RA.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acr.24114DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

disease activity
20
treat-to-target approach
16
control group
16
activity score
16
learning collaborative
12
treat-to-target implementation
12
patient visits
12
approach rheumatoid
8
rheumatoid arthritis
8
quality improvement
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!