Effect of the addition of a mental health specialist for evaluation of undiagnosed patients in centres for rare diseases (ZSE-DUO): a prospective, controlled trial with a two-phase cohort design.

Background: People with complex symptomatology but unclear diagnosis presenting to a centre for rare diseases (CRD) may present with mental (co-)morbidity. We hypothesised that combining an expert in somatic medicine with a mental health specialist working in tandem will improve the diagnostic outcome. Methods: Patients aged 12 years and older who presented to one of the 11 participating German CRDs with an unknown diagnosis were recruited into this prospective cohort trial with a two-phase cohort design. From October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019, participants were allocated to standard care (SC, N = 684), and from October 1, 2019 to January 31, 2021 to innovative care (IC, N = 695). The cohorts consisted mainly of adult participants with only a minority of children included (N = 67). IC included the involvement of a mental health specialist in all aspects of care (e.g., assessing medical records, clinic visits, telehealth care, and case conferences). Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03563677. Findings: The proportion of patients with diagnoses established within 12 months after the first visit to the CRD explaining the entire symptomatology (primary outcome) was 19% (N = 131 of 672) in the SC and 42% (N = 286 of 686) in the IC cohort (OR adjusted for centre effects 3.45 [95% CrI: 1.99-5.65]). The difference was mainly due to a higher prevalence of mental disorders and non-rare somatic diseases in the IC cohort. The median time to explaining diagnoses was one month shorter with IC (95% CrI: 1-2), and significantly more patients could be referred to local regular care in the IC (27.5%; N = 181 of 659) compared to the SC (12.3%; N = 81 of 658) cohort (OR adjusted for centre effects 2.70 [95% CrI: 2.02-3.60]). At 12-month follow-up, patient satisfaction with care was significantly higher in the IC compared to the SC cohort, while quality of life was not different between cohorts. Interpretation: Our findings suggested that including a mental health specialist in the entire evaluation process of CRDs for undiagnosed adolescents and adults should become an integral part of the assessment of individuals with a suspected rare disease. Funding: The study was funded by the Global Innovation Fund from the Joint Federal Committee in Germany (Innovationsfonds des Gemeinsamen Bundesausschusses), grant number 01NVF17031.

[Quality of Life and Experienced Distress of Patients Suspected of having a Rare (Chronic) Health Condition - Initial Findings from the ZSE-DUO Study]. / Lebensqualität und erlebte Belastungen von Patient*innen mit Verdacht auf eine Seltene Erkrankung ­ erste Erkenntnisse aus der ZSE-DUO Studie.

OBJECTIVE: Patients suspected of having a rare (chronic) health condition have often gone a long way within the healthcare system. To date, little is known about the health-related quality of life of this group of patients. The study aims to describe the health-related quality of life and the perceived distress of patients suspected of having a rare (chronic) health condition and compare the results with standard values of the German population. METHODS: Eighty patients suspected of having a rare (chronic) health condition were recruited in the nationwide intervention study "ZSE-DUO" and reported their health-related quality of life and perceived distress using the SF-8 and the Distress-Thermometer. RESULTS: The patients rated all eight dimensions of quality of life as well as the physical and mental component scores of the SF-8 significantly lower than the general population. On average, the perceived distress was rated significantly higher. More than 90% of the sample indicated distress in the clinical range. Exhaustion, pain, limited mobility as well as worries and fears were mentioned most frequently as concrete problems, with percentages ranging from 73% to 90% of the total sample. DISCUSSION: In comparison to German reference data, patients suspected of having a rare (chronic) health condition report a massive impairment of their quality of life and a high burden, which is especially characterized by physical and emotional problems. The lack of a diagnosis could explain the high proportion of emotional problems, as it can create a form of legitimation of one's own disease experience. CONCLUSION: The present results underline the need for research on the psychosocial impact of the possible presence of a rare (chronic) health condition. The high distress and the impact on the physical and psychological quality of life domains also highlight the need for care in this patient group.

Dual guidance structure for evaluation of patients with unclear diagnosis in centers for rare diseases (ZSE-DUO): study protocol for a controlled multi-center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In individuals suffering from a rare disease the diagnostic process and the confirmation of a final diagnosis often extends over many years. Factors contributing to delayed diagnosis include health care professionals' limited knowledge of rare diseases and frequent (co-)occurrence of mental disorders that may complicate and delay the diagnostic process. The ZSE-DUO study aims to assess the benefits of a combination of a physician focusing on somatic aspects with a mental health expert working side by side as a tandem in the diagnostic process. STUDY DESIGN: This multi-center, prospective controlled study has a two-phase cohort design. METHODS: Two cohorts of 682 patients each are sequentially recruited from 11 university-based German Centers for Rare Diseases (CRD): the standard care cohort (control, somatic expertise only) and the innovative care cohort (experimental, combined somatic and mental health expertise). Individuals aged 12 years and older presenting with symptoms and signs which are not explained by current diagnoses will be included. Data will be collected prior to the first visit to the CRD's outpatient clinic (T0), at the first visit (T1) and 12 months thereafter (T2). OUTCOMES: Primary outcome is the percentage of patients with one or more confirmed diagnoses covering the symptomatic spectrum presented. Sample size is calculated to detect a 10 percent increase from 30% in standard care to 40% in the innovative dual expert cohort. Secondary outcomes are (a) time to diagnosis/diagnoses explaining the symptomatology; (b) proportion of patients successfully referred from CRD to standard care; (c) costs of diagnosis including incremental cost effectiveness ratios; (d) predictive value of screening instruments administered at T0 to identify patients with mental disorders; (e) patients' quality of life and evaluation of care; and f) physicians' satisfaction with the innovative care approach. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multi-center study to investigate the effects of a mental health specialist working in tandem with a somatic expert physician in CRDs. If this innovative approach proves successful, it will be made available on a larger scale nationally and promoted internationally. In the best case, ZSE-DUO can significantly shorten the time to diagnosis for a suspected rare disease. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT03563677; First posted: June 20, 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03563677 .