4.0 Article

Physician Ability to Assess Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Using an Electronic Medical Record-Based Disease Activity Calculator

Journal

ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM-ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH
Volume 61, Issue 4, Pages 495-500

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/art.24335

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Centocor
  2. Pfizer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. To assess physicians' concordance with Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) categories calculated by an electronic medical record (EMR)-embedded disease activity calculator, as well as attitudes toward this application. Methods. Fifteen rheumatologists used the EMR-embedded disease activity calculator to predict a rheumatoid arthritis (RA) DAS28 disease activity category at the time of each clinical encounter. Results. physician-predicted DAS28 disease activity categories ranged from high (> 5.1, 15% of cohort, 66 of 429 patient visits) to moderate (>3.2-5.1, 21% of cohort, 90 of 429 patient visits) to low (2.6-3.2, 29% of cohort, 123 of 429 patient visits) to remission (<2.6, 35% of cohort, 150 of 429 patient visits). Overall concordance between calculated DAS28 results and physician-predicted RA disease activity was 64%. Using either the physician-predicted or the calculated DAS28 category as the gold standard, accuracy was greatest for patients in remission (75% and 88% accuracy, respectively) and those with high disease activity (68% and 79% accuracy, respectively), and less for patients with moderate (48% and 62% accuracy, respectively) or low disease activity (62% and 31% accuracy, respectively). Conclusion. Accurate physician prediction of DAS28 remission and high disease activity categories, even without immediate availability of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate or the C-reactive protein level at the time of the visit, may be used to guide quantitatively driven outpatient RA management.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available