Glauser Terry Ann, Ruderman Eric M, Kummerle Dale, Kelly Sheila
CE Outcomes LLC, 107 Frankfurt Circle, Birmingham, AL, 35211, USA.
Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.
Rheumatol Ther. 2014 Dec;1(1):31-44. doi: 10.1007/s40744-014-0004-5. Epub 2014 Sep 26.
As the therapeutic landscape for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) continues to change, it is relevant to examine current treatment patterns among rheumatologists. The purpose of this study was to identify attitudes and practices of US rheumatologists with respect to RA.
Nine-hundred and one US-practicing rheumatologists were sent electronic invites (via email or fax) to participate in a case-vignette survey in April 2013. All respondents were currently practicing rheumatology and seeing at least one RA patient per week. The survey examined current attitudes, existing knowledge, management choices and perceived barriers in the management of RA. Data collection stopped once 125 responses were received.
Approximately half of the 125 respondents were very familiar with current clinical practice guidelines for RA diagnosis and management. There was no consensus on which validated tools to use when assessing RA severity, with 54% using Physician Global Assessment and 34% using Disease Activity Score 28 at initial assessment. Most respondents (74%) used methotrexate (MTX) as initial therapy for a newly diagnosed RA patient. Eighty-six percent of respondents would add a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) when MTX alone could not control RA. There was no consensus on which treatment should be used when a TNFi is ineffective. The majority of respondents (66% of respondents) would prescribe TNFis indefinitely in patients with continued response. If a patient was in stable remission on MTX and a TNFi, respondents were most likely to maintain this regimen (53% of respondents); a notable minority (43%) would lower the MTX dose. When prescribing biologics, respondents were most concerned with infection; infection was considered a very significant barrier to biologic use. Although 98% of respondents indicated that they personally educate patients about RA, only 42% provide written material.
The lack of consistency in responses suggests that rheumatologists may benefit from continuing medical education on; clinical practice guidelines; the most recent evidence for management of patients in remission; the use of biologic agents after infection; and management of patients with RA and comorbidities.
随着类风湿关节炎(RA)的治疗格局不断变化,审视风湿病学家当前的治疗模式具有重要意义。本研究的目的是确定美国风湿病学家对RA的态度和实践。
2013年4月,向901名在美国执业的风湿病学家发送了电子邀请(通过电子邮件或传真),邀请他们参与一项病例 vignette 调查。所有受访者均为目前从事风湿病学工作且每周至少诊治一名RA患者。该调查考察了RA管理方面的当前态度、现有知识、管理选择和感知障碍。一旦收到125份回复,数据收集即停止。
125名受访者中约有一半对RA诊断和管理的当前临床实践指南非常熟悉。在评估RA严重程度时,对于使用哪种经过验证的工具没有达成共识,54%的人在初始评估时使用医生整体评估,34%的人使用疾病活动评分28。大多数受访者(74%)将甲氨蝶呤(MTX)作为新诊断RA患者的初始治疗。86%的受访者在MTX单药无法控制RA时会加用肿瘤坏死因子抑制剂(TNFi)。当TNFi无效时,对于应使用哪种治疗方法没有达成共识。大多数受访者(66%的受访者)会在持续有反应的患者中无限期地使用TNFi。如果患者在MTX和TNFi治疗下处于稳定缓解状态,受访者最有可能维持该治疗方案(53%的受访者);相当一部分人(43%)会降低MTX剂量。在开具生物制剂时,受访者最担心感染;感染被认为是生物制剂使用非常重要的障碍。尽管98%的受访者表示他们亲自对患者进行RA教育,但只有42%提供书面材料。
回答缺乏一致性表明,风湿病学家可能会从继续医学教育中受益,内容包括:临床实践指南;缓解期患者管理的最新证据;感染后生物制剂的使用;以及RA合并症患者的管理。