How do patients with systemic sclerosis experience currently provided healthcare and how should we measure its quality?

OBJECTIVES: To gain insight into SSc patients' perspective on quality of care and to survey their preferred quality indicators. METHODS: An online questionnaire about healthcare setting, perceived quality of care (CQ index) and quality indicators, was sent to 2093 patients from 13 Dutch hospitals. RESULTS: Six hundred and fifty patients (mean age 59 years, 75% women, 32% limited cutaneous SSc, 20% diffuse cutaneous SSc) completed the questionnaire. Mean time to diagnosis was 4.3 years (s.d. 6.9) and was longer in women compared with men (4.8 (s.d. 7.3) vs 2.5 (s.d. 5.0) years). Treatment took place in a SSc expert centre for 58%, regional centre for 29% or in both for 39% of patients. Thirteen percent of patients was not aware of whether their hospital was specialized in SSc. The perceived quality of care was rated with a mean score of 3.2 (s.d. 0.5) (range 1.0-4.0). There were no relevant differences between expert and regional centres. The three prioritized process indicators were: good patient-physician interaction (80%), structural multidisciplinary collaboration (46%) and receiving treatment according to SSc guidelines (44%). Absence of disease progression (66%), organ involvement (33%) and digital ulcers (27%) were the three highest rated outcome indicators. CONCLUSION: The perceived quality of care evaluated in our study was fair to good. No differences between expert and regional centres were observed. Our prioritized process and outcome indicators can be added to indicators suggested by SSc experts in earlier studies and can be used to evaluate the quality of care in SSc.

Physical Therapy in Systemic Sclerosis: The Patient Perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the use, satisfaction, needs, and preferences regarding physical therapy (PT) in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). METHODS: A total of 405 SSc patients, treated in the Leiden University Medical Center multidisciplinary care program and fulfilling American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) 2013 SSc criteria, received a questionnaire containing 37 questions on use and satisfaction regarding PT over a 2-year period, and their needs and preferences for future PT. RESULTS: A total of 204 SSc patients (median age 63 years, 81% female) completed the questionnaire. One hundred twenty-eight patients (63%) had used or were using PT in a primary care setting. For 39% of patients not using PT, lack of referral or lack of knowledge was the reason for not using it. The most frequently reported active treatments were muscle-strengthening (n = 92 [72%]), range of motion (n = 77 [60%]), and aerobic exercises (n = 72 [56%]). Specific SSc hand- and mouth-opening exercises were reported by 20 (15%) and 7 (6%) patients, respectively. Manual treatment (massage or passive mobilization) was reported by 83 patients (65%). The mean ± SD satisfaction score (range 0-10) was 8.2 ± 1.6. Regarding patients' needs, 96 patients (47%) of the total group wanted to receive more information concerning PT, and 128 (63%) wanted to continue, start, or restart PT in the near future, with 56 of the 128 patients (44%) favoring individual treatment on a continuous basis. CONCLUSION: We observed a significant variation in the use and content of PT for SSc patients in a primary care setting. Our results suggest potential underuse of PT care, in particular for hand and oral dysfunction, and underpin the need for initiatives to improve the quality and accessibility of PT care for SSc patients.