4.5 Article

Effect of Rheumatologist Education on Systematic Measurements and Treatment Decisions in Rheumatoid Arthritis: The Metrix Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 39, Issue 12, Pages 2247-2252

Publisher

J RHEUMATOL PUBL CO
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.120597

Keywords

EDUCATION; KNOWLEDGE TRANSLATION EXCHANGE; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; CHART AUDIT; SMALL GROUP LEARNING; COMPARATIVE FEEDBACK

Categories

Funding

  1. Abbott Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. To determine whether an educational intervention could result in changes in physicians' practice behavior. Methods. Twenty rheumatologists performed a prospective chart audit of 50 consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and again after 6 months. Ten were randomized to the educational intervention: monthly Web-based conferences on the value of systematic assessments in RA, recent evidence-based information, practice efficiency, and other topics; this group also read articles on targeting care in RA. The others were randomized to no intervention. Results. One thousand serial RA charts were audited at baseline and 1000 at 6 months, with no between-group differences in patient characteristics: mean disease duration of 10 years; 77% women; 74% rheumatoid factor-positive; mean Disease Activity Score (DAS) 3.7; and 68% taking methotrexate, 14% taking steroids, and 27% taking biologics. At 6 months the intervention group collected more global assessments (patient global 53% preintervention vs 66% postintervention, and MD global 51% vs 60%; p < 0.05) and Health Assessment Questionnaires (37% vs 42%; p > 0.05; p = nonsignificant), whereas controls had no change in outcomes collected. For the intervention group there was a 32% increase in calculable composite scores [such as DAS, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Clinical Disease Activity Index; p < 0.05] but no change in the controls. There was more targeting to a low disease state. For those with SDAI between 3.3 and 11, the percentage of patients receiving a change in therapy was 66% in the intervention group and 36% in controls (p < 0.05). When DAS was between 2.4 and 3.6,57% of the intervention group and 38% of controls made changes to treatment (p < 0.05). Conclusion. Small-group learning with feedback from practice audits is an inexpensive way to improve outcomes in RA. (First Release Oct 15 2012; J Rheumatol 2012;39:2247-52; doi:10.3899/jrheum.120597)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available