Yen Jim C, Abrahamowicz Michal, Dobkin Patricia L, Clarke Ann E, Battista Renaldo N, Fortin Paul R
Division of Clinical Epidemiology, The McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
J Rheumatol. 2003 Sep;30(9):1967-76.
We evaluated different methods for quantifying patient-physician discordance and identified factors associated with discordance in the assessment of lupus disease activity.
Data from 208 female patients who had a comprehensive annual examination were extracted from the Montreal General Hospital Lupus Registry. Discordance was measured by the difference between the patient self-reported 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS) and the physician VAS for global disease activity (VASDIFF). Multiple linear regression was used to identify the correlates of discordance, e.g., SF-36TM scales, Systemic Lupus Activity Measure (SLAM) components, etc. Four regression models were estimated using: (1) all patients; (2) only patients who evaluated disease activity higher than their physician's assessment; (3) only patients who evaluated disease activity lower than their physician's assessment; and (4) all patients, with the absolute value of VASDIFF as the dependent variable.
Of the 208 observations, 150 (72%) of the VASDIFF scores were within +/- 2.5 cm on a 10 cm scale, indicating absence of marked discordance; 43 (20.7%) were from patients overscoring and 15 (7.2%) from patients underscoring their physician by at least 2.5 cm. Higher SF-36 role physical score, more bodily pain, and lower role emotional score in addition to the SLAM-skin component were independently associated with higher discordance. SF-36 social function and mental health scores as well as SLAM-neurological and kidney components were correlated with discordance in some subanalyses. Bodily pain was the most important variable for predicting "clinically relevant" discordance, followed by SLAM-skin and kidney components.
Discordance between patients and physicians may result from patients scoring their disease activity based on their psychological and physical well-being, whereas physicians score disease activity based on the clinical and physical signs and symptoms of lupus.
我们评估了量化患者与医生意见不一致的不同方法,并确定了狼疮疾病活动评估中与不一致相关的因素。
从蒙特利尔综合医院狼疮登记处提取了208名接受全面年度检查的女性患者的数据。通过患者自我报告的10厘米视觉模拟量表(VAS)与医生对整体疾病活动的VAS之间的差异(VASDIFF)来衡量不一致程度。使用多元线性回归来确定不一致的相关因素,例如SF - 36TM量表、系统性狼疮活动度量表(SLAM)的组成部分等。使用以下方法估计了四个回归模型:(1)所有患者;(2)仅疾病活动评估高于医生评估的患者;(3)仅疾病活动评估低于医生评估的患者;(4)所有患者,以VASDIFF的绝对值作为因变量。
在208项观察结果中,150项(72%)的VASDIFF分数在10厘米量表上的±2.5厘米范围内,表明不存在明显的不一致;43项(20.7%)来自患者评分高于医生的情况,15项(7.2%)来自患者评分低于医生至少2.5厘米的情况。除了SLAM - 皮肤组成部分外,较高的SF - 36角色身体评分、更多的身体疼痛和较低的角色情感评分与较高的不一致独立相关。在一些亚分析中,SF - 36社会功能和心理健康评分以及SLAM - 神经和肾脏组成部分与不一致相关。身体疼痛是预测“临床相关”不一致的最重要变量,其次是SLAM - 皮肤和肾脏组成部分。
患者与医生之间的不一致可能是由于患者根据自身心理和身体健康状况对疾病活动进行评分,而医生则根据狼疮的临床和身体体征及症状对疾病活动进行评分。