Effectiveness of initial methotrexate-based treatment approaches in early rheumatoid arthritis: an elicitation of rheumatologists' beliefs.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify rheumatologists' beliefs about the effectiveness of triple therapy (MTX + HCQ + SSZ) and other commonly used initial treatments for RA. METHODS: In a Bayesian belief elicitation exercise, 40 rheumatologists distributed 20 chips, each representing 5% of their total weight of belief on the probability that a typical patient with moderate-severe early RA would have an ACR50 response within 6 months with MTX (oral and s.c.), MTX + HCQ (dual therapy) and triple therapy. Parametric distributions were fit, and used to calculate pairwise median relative risks (RR), with 95% credible intervals, and estimate sample sizes for new trials to shift these beliefs. RESULTS: In the pooled analysis, triple therapy was perceived to be superior to MTX (RR 1.97; 1.35, 2.89) and dual therapy (RR 1.32; 1.03, 1.73). A pessimistic subgroup (n = 10) perceived all treatments to be similar, whereas an optimistic subgroup (n = 10) believed triple therapy to be most effective of all (RR 4.03; 2.22, 10.12). Similar variability was seen for the comparison between oral and s.c. MTX. Assuming triple therapy is truly more effective than MTX, a trial of 100 patients would be required to convince the pessimists; if triple therapy truly has no-modest effect (RR <1.5), a non-inferiority trial of 475 patients would be required to convince the optimists. CONCLUSION: Rheumatologists' beliefs regarding the effectiveness of triple therapy vary, which may partially explain the variability in its use. Owing to the strength of beliefs, some may be reluctant to shift, even with new evidence.

US rheumatologists' beliefs and knowledge about biosimilars: a survey.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate perceptions of biosimilar products among US rheumatologists who prescribe TNF-α inhibitors, given that 10 TNF-α inhibitor biosimilars and two rituximab biosimilars have Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. METHODS: A 19-question self-administered online survey was conducted from 6 May to 1 June 2019, and fielded by WebMD, LLC. Rheumatologists (n = 9050) who were members of Medscape.com and its partner panels were invited to participate. Likert and other rating scales were used to collect responses, which were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 320 board-certified US rheumatologists, 85% of whom were fellows of the ACR. Nearly all respondents were familiar with the FDA definition of a biosimilar product and were aware that an infliximab biosimilar was FDA approved; fewer realized that adalimumab, etanercept and rituximab biosimilars were also FDA approved. Most respondents (84%) were aware that an approved biosimilar was not automatically deemed interchangeable by the FDA. Rheumatologists were more likely to initiate biosimilar treatment for a biologic treatment-naïve patient with RA (73%) than they were to switch to the biosimilar for a patient with RA doing well on the reference product (35%). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey suggest that US rheumatologists have a good understanding and acceptance of biosimilar products, particularly for the initiation of treatment in biologic-naïve individuals. They were hesitant to switch from a reference product to a biosimilar for a patient doing well on the reference product. Additional education on biosimilars is required to help inform treatment decisions by rheumatologists. A plain language summary of this article has been uploaded as supplementary material, available at Rheumatology online.

Are Systemic Corticosteroids Causing Psoriasis Flare-Ups? Questionnaire for Danish Dermatologists, Gastroenterologists and Rheumatologists.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis flare-ups and the change of morphology from nonpustular to pustular psoriasis following tapering and withdrawal of systemic corticosteroids have been reported. Despite these risks, systemic corticosteroids are still widely prescribed for patients with psoriasis, but the knowledge about psoriasis flare-ups and whether the physicians take precautions during these treatments is limited. METHODS: We conducted a questionnaire study among all dermatologists, gastroenterologists and rheumatologists in Denmark who work at a hospital or in a private practice to investigate the use, opinion and experience with oral, intramuscular and intra-articular corticosteroids in the treatment of patients with psoriasis. RESULTS: We received answers from a total of 248 physicians. Compared with oral and intramuscular corticosteroids, intra-articular corticosteroids were the most reported treatment in patients with psoriasis and only used by the rheumatologists. It was mainly the dermatologists and rheumatologists who had observed psoriasis flare-ups following treatment with oral, intramuscular and intra-articular corticosteroids. Half of the dermatologists (50%) and a fourth of the rheumatologists (29%) had observed at least one psoriasis flare-up following treatment with oral corticosteroids. About 10% of both the dermatologists and the rheumatologists had observed at least one psoriasis flare-up following treatment with intramuscular and/or intra-articular corticosteroids. Overall, 44% of the respondents took precautions, when they treated a patient with psoriasis with oral, intramuscular and intra-articular corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: The results from the questionnaire indicate that systemic corticosteroids for patients with psoriasis can cause flare-ups and should be used with care.

Analysis of the first 5 years of an interdisciplinary Rheumatology-Dermatology clinic.

BACKGROUND: Multispeciality clinics, such as combined psoriasis-psoriatic arthritis clinics, have shown improved outcomes in various diseases. At Massachusetts General Hospital, we are entering our ninth year of having an interdisciplinary Rheumatology-Dermatology (R-D) clinic. AIM: To evaluate the contribution of an R-D clinic by comparing care of patients pre- and post-evaluation in the combined clinic. As proxies of care, rates and comprehensiveness of evaluations (capillaroscopic examination, skin and joint examination) were compared between the combined clinic and standard Rheumatology or Dermatology clinic. METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of patients at the R-D clinic in Massachusetts General Hospital during the period November 2012 to December 2017. RESULTS: Prior to the patients visiting the R-D only 5% of capillaroscopic examinations were documented, only 5% of rheumatologists specifically described a rash even when present, and pruritus was documented in only 6% of rheumatology notes. By contrast, in the R-D clinic, capillaroscopic, skin and joint examinations were documented in 100% of visits, and 19% of patients were given a different or a refined diagnosis. Although all our patients had cutaneous manifestations of their disease (hair loss, rash, itch, Raynaud phenomenon, ulcerations, calcinosis) only 34% had seen a dermatologist prior to the combined clinic and only 5% of those had had their concerns addressed by the rheumatologist. This suggests that 95% had a more complete evaluation and management of all aspects of their disease by attendance at the R-D clinic. CONCLUSION: Despite this study being limited by its retrospective nature, we found that it is an efficient model to achieve more comprehensive and potentially lower medication costs. Collaboration between dermatologists and rheumatologists in a combined clinic led to more complete skin and joint examinations, consistent tracking of capillaroscopic examination, better description of rash and improved management. Having this clinic helped in reaching a diagnosis and overall better disease control and outcome.

Acceptance of Telerheumatology by Rheumatologists and General Practitioners in Germany: Nationwide Cross-sectional Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: The worldwide burden of musculoskeletal diseases is increasing. The number of newly registered rheumatologists has stagnated. Primary care, which takes up a key role in early detection of rheumatic disease, is working at full capacity. COVID-19 and its containment impede rheumatological treatment. Telemedicine in rheumatology (telerheumatology) could support rheumatologists and general practitioners. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to investigate acceptance and preferences related to the use of telerheumatology care among German rheumatologists and general practitioners. METHODS: A nationwide, cross-sectional, self-completed, paper-based survey on telerheumatology care was conducted among outpatient rheumatologists and general practitioners during the pre-COVID-19 period. RESULTS: A total of 73.3% (349/476) of survey participants rated their knowledge of telemedicine as unsatisfactory, poor, or very poor. The majority of survey participants (358/480, 74.6%) answered that they do not currently use telemedicine, although 62.3% (291/467) would like to. Barriers to the implementation of telemedicine include the purchase of technology equipment (182/292, 62.3%), administration (181/292, 62.0%), and poor reimbursement (156/292, 53.4%). A total of 69.6% (117/168) of the surveyed physicians reckoned that telemedicine could be used in rheumatology. Surveyed physicians would prefer to use telemedicine to communicate directly with other physicians (370/455, 81.3%) than to communicate with patients (213/455, 46.8%). Among treatment phases, 64.4% (291/452) of participants would choose to use telemedicine during follow-up. Half of the participants would choose telecounseling as a specific approach to improve rheumatology care (91/170, 53.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Before COVID-19 appeared, our results indicated generally low use but high acceptance of the implementation of telerheumatology among physicians. Participants indicated that the lack of a structural framework was a barrier to the effective implementation of telerheumatology. Training courses should be introduced to address the limited knowledge on the part of physicians in the use of telemedicine. More research into telerheumatology is required. This includes large-scale randomized controlled trials, economic analyses, and the exploration of user preferences.

Rheumatologists' practice during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: a survey in Egypt.

The aim of this work is to trace how rheumatologists all over Egypt are approaching the COVID-19 pandemic and what changes it has brought about in the patients' care with special attention to its effect on vulnerable rheumatic disease (RD) patients. This survey further aims to help inform the rheumatology community about the changes in practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey included 26 questions distributed to University staff members across Egypt members of the Egyptian College of Rheumatology (ECR). It takes 5-10 min to fill out. The practice setting of participating rheumatologists included University Teaching Hospitals that are the main rheumatology and clinical immunology service providers for adults and children RD patients. There was an overall agreement across the country in the responses to the survey that took a median time of 7 min to fill in. Potential changes in rheumatology outpatient practice by staff members evolved since the COVID-19 pandemic. None of the university rheumatology staff members has prescribed chloroquine or HCQ to prevent or treat COVID-19 in a non-hospitalized patient who was not previously on it. Twenty-three recommended decrease/avoid NSAIDs if the RD patient had confirmed COVID-19 or symptoms. There is an agreement to the key emerging frontline role of rheumatologists in treating COVID-19. During the pandemic, RD cases requiring admission were dealt with by several modified strategies. The overall agreement among the different university rheumatology departments during such critical situation has provoked the ECR to consider providing provisional guidelines for dealing with RD patients during this global catastrophe.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis facing sick leave or work disability meet varying regulations: a study among rheumatologists and patients from 44 European countries.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and explore differences in formal regulations around sick leave and work disability (WD) for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as well as perceptions by rheumatologists and patients on the system's performance, across European countries. METHODS: We conducted three cross-sectional surveys in 50 European countries: one on work (re-)integration and social security (SS) system arrangements in case of sick leave and long-term WD due to RA (one rheumatologist per country), and two among approximately 15 rheumatologists and 15 patients per country on perceptions regarding SS arrangements on work participation. Differences in regulations and perceptions were compared across categories defined by gross domestic product (GDP), type of social welfare regime, European Union (EU) membership and country RA WD rates. RESULTS: Forty-four (88%) countries provided data on regulations, 33 (75%) on perceptions of rheumatologists (n=539) and 34 (77%) on perceptions of patients (n=719). While large variation was observed across all regulations across countries, no relationship was found between most of regulations or income compensation and GDP, type of SS system or rates of WD. Regarding perceptions, rheumatologists in high GDP and EU-member countries felt less confident in their role in the decision process towards WD (ß=-0.5 (95% CI -0.9 to -0.2) and ß=-0.5 (95% CI -1.0 to -0.1), respectively). The Scandinavian and Bismarckian system scored best on patients' and rheumatologists' perceptions of regulations and system performance. CONCLUSIONS: There is large heterogeneity in rules and regulations of SS systems across Europe in relation to WD of patients with RA, and it cannot be explained by existing welfare regimes, EU membership or country's wealth.

Performance of referral strategies for spondyloarthritis: a population-based nationwide study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the referral strategy (RS) for SpA of a nationwide epidemiological study (EpiReumaPt), as compared with previously proposed RSs. METHODS: EpiReumaPt was a three-stage national epidemiologic study. In phase one, 10 661 adult participants were randomly selected and screened for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. In the second phase, positive screenings for ⩾1 rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease plus 20% negative screenings were assessed by a rheumatologist. Finally, three rheumatologists revised all the information and defined the final diagnosis. All participants from phase two were included. Thirteen RS were tested against the SpA diagnosis using several metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, the post-test probability of SpA given a positive RS (positive predictive value) and given a negative RS (1 - negative predictive value). RESULTS: From the total 3877 participants, 92 received a SpA diagnosis [weighted national prevalence: 1.6% (95% confidence interval: 1.2, 2.1)]. Modified versions of the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-RS and EpiReumaPt-RS were the most sensitive (85% and 72%, respectively) and yielded the lowest post-test probabilities of SpA if negative (0.6% and 0.7%, respectively). Considering the national prevalence (pre-test probability) of SpA (1.6%), a negative screening by these two RSs decreased the probability of SpA substantially (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society: -63%; EpiReumaPt: -56%). Other RSs performed less well in reducing disease probability (range: -6.3%; -37.5%). Overall, the probability of SpA given a positive RS was small (positive predictive value range: 2.2%; 7.6%) and the EpiReumaPt RS yielded the best balance between sensitivity and positive predictive value. CONCLUSION: The proposed EpiReumaPt RS performed the best as a screening tool for SpA in patients from the general population when laboratory and imaging data were not available.

Practice-based differences in paediatric discoid lupus erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Children with discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) are at risk for disfigurement and progression to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Consensus is lacking regarding optimal care for children with DLE. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare practice patterns among paediatric dermatologists/rheumatologists treating paediatric DLE. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 292 paediatric rheumatologists in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance and 200 paediatric dermatologists in the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement. RESULTS: Survey response rates were 38% (76 of 200) for dermatology and 21% (60 of 292) for rheumatology. Both specialties agreed that screening labs should include complete blood counts with differential, urinalysis, complement levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, antinuclear antibody and other autoantibodies, hepatic function and renal function/electrolytes. Both specialties agreed that arthritis or nephritis should prompt intensified evaluation for SLE. No other patient features achieved consensus as disease-modifying risk factors. Hydroxychloroquine was agreed upon as first-line systemic therapy, but consensus was lacking for second- or third-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We found few areas of consensus and significant practice differences between paediatric dermatologists and rheumatologists treating DLE. Knowledge gaps include risk factors for SLE, optimal screening and treatment of refractory skin disease.

Planning for the Rheumatologist Workforce: Factors Associated With Work Hours and Volumes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with rheumatologists' clinical work hours and patient volumes based on a national workforce survey in rheumatology. METHODS: Adult rheumatologists who participated in a 2015 workforce survey were included (n = 255). Univariate analysis evaluated the relationship between demographics (sex, age, academic vs. community practice, billing fee for service vs. other plan, years in practice, retirement plans) and workload (total hours and number of ½-day clinics per week) or patient volumes (number of new and follow-up consults per week). Multiple linear regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between practice type, sex, age, and working hours or clinical volumes. RESULTS: Male rheumatologists had more ½-day clinics (p = 0.05) and saw more new patients per week (p = 0.001) compared with females. Community rheumatologists had more ½-day clinics and new and follow-up visits per week (all p < 0.01). Fee-for-service rheumatologists reported more ½-day clinics per week (p < 0.001) and follow-ups (p = 0.04). Workload did not vary by age, years in practice, or retirement plans. In multivariate analysis, community practice remained independently associated with higher patient volumes and more clinics per week. Female rheumatologists reported fewer clinics and fewer follow-up patients per week than males, but this did not affect the duration of working hours or new consultations. Age was not associated with work volumes or hours. CONCLUSIONS: Practice type and rheumatologist sex should be considered when evaluating rheumatologist workforce needs, as the proportion of female rheumatologists has increased over time and alternative billing practices have been introduced in many centers.

Services for spondyloarthritis: a survey of patients and rheumatologists.

Objectives: There have been significant advances in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), with implications for service delivery. We evaluated the state of axSpA rheumatology services and how people with axSpA perceive their care. Methods: An online patient survey was emailed to all members of the National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society and advertised widely via social media. Separately, a Web-based questionnaire about axSpA services was sent to rheumatologists at all 172 acute hospital trusts in the UK. Results: From the National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society survey, data for 1979 surveys (56% males) were available for analysis. The majority of respondents had longstanding disease and identified their diagnosis as AS, with only 44% aware of the term axSpA. Eighty-two per cent of respondents were currently attending a rheumatologist, with 43% on biologic agents. Satisfaction scores for rheumatology care were high. Respondents' concerns included access during disease flares and adverse effects of analgesics. From the rheumatology survey, the concept and terminology of axSpA was widely accepted by respondents (88%). The majority of centres had at least one rheumatologist with a specialist interest in axSpA (62%), dedicated axSpA clinics (58%) or a multidisciplinary team for axSpA (64%). BASDAI (99%), BASFI (74%) and BASMI (65%) were routinely performed. All centres had access to MRI scans, but scanning protocols varied and were often sub-optimal. Conclusion: Although overall satisfaction with rheumatology care was high, the results indicate significant unmet patient needs and discrepancies in service provision. This information will inform the development of quality standards for axSpA in order to improve quality and deliver equitable care for all patients.

Attitudes Toward and Management of Fibromyalgia: A National Survey of Canadian Rheumatologists and Critical Appraisal of Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Canadian rheumatologists' attitudes toward and management of fibromyalgia remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore management strategies and attitudes of Canadian rheumatologists toward fibromyalgia and concordance with guideline recommendations. METHODS: We administered a 17-item cross-sectional survey to Canadian rheumatologists and explored the concordance between respondents' management practices with the 2012 Canadian Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Among 331 Canadian rheumatologists who were approached, 140 returned the survey for a 42% response rate. The majority felt that fibromyalgia was a useful clinical diagnosis (110/138 [80%]) but was divided as to whether fibromyalgia was objectively defined (75/138 [54%]) or a psychosocial condition (42/138 [30%]) or could result in an inability to work (37/138 [27%]). Contrary to guideline recommendations, most (82/134 [61%]) endorsed that tender points were useful for diagnosis. Half endorsed potentially refusing consultations with fibromyalgia patients, and only 42% (59/139) agreed that there were effective therapies for this syndrome. Consistent with the guideline, most respondents managed fibromyalgia with education, exercise therapy, antidepressants, and nonnarcotic analgesics (≥89% for all); however, fewer than half agreed that any of these modalities were effective (endorsement ranged from 9% to 47%). Assessment of the 2012 guideline revealed a number of important limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian rheumatologists largely do not provide primary care for fibromyalgia. Most adhere to guideline recommendations for management of fibromyalgia, but few endorse these interventions as effective. Further research, including updating of the 2012 Canadian Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of fibromyalgia, is required to inform this disconnect.

Practice patterns in longitudinal lupus care provision: patient and physician perspectives.

Background/purpose To plan a quality improvement project, we need to understand the practice patterns of physicians. We undertook an online survey of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients and physicians providing care to SLE patients to determine the patterns of medical care provided to SLE patients. Materials and methods Two self-report surveys were developed. A 12-item survey for the patients and a 13-item survey for physicians enquired about longitudinal care for SLE. Surveys were administered online to physicians providing care to SLE patients, and to patients who self-identified as having SLE, through the Lupus Society of Illinois. Patient and physician data were analyzed for physician practice patterns for SLE care, using chi square tests and t tests. A P value of 0.05 or less was considered significant on two-tailed tests. Results A total of 283 patients completed the survey. Mean (SD) age and disease duration of patients were 45.9 (13.2) and 12.7 (9.7) years. Half of the participants were being seen at 3-4-month intervals. More than 70% of patients reported being tested for antinuclear antibody (ANA), and 20-30% anti-ENA antibody and Sjögren's (SSA/SSB) antibodies, respectively, at each follow-up visit. Eighty-six rheumatologists completed the surveys. Mean (SD) age was 55 (12) years and 56% were men. More than half (54%) provided care only in a private practice setting. More than 80% of physicians reported seeing their SLE patients at 3-4-month interval. Only 2% reported performing ANA tests at each visit, while 4-5% performed anti-ENA and anti-SSA/SSB antibody tests at each visit for their SLE patients. More than 75% of physicians in private practice also ordered sedimentation rate at each visit for their SLE patients. Conclusions Unnecessary laboratory investigations may be being ordered routinely for patients at every visit. These results indicate a need for physician education on indications and utility of some of the laboratory tests such as ANA.

Choosing wisely in daily practice: a mixed methods study on determinants of antinuclear antibody testing by rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the relationship between antinuclear antibody (ANA) overuse and rheumatologist-related factors before and after an intervention aimed at reducing ANA overuse. METHOD: In this mixed methods study we performed surveys among rheumatologists (n = 20) before and after the ANA intervention (education and feedback). We identified clinician-related determinants of ANA overuse (demographic characteristics, cognitive bias, numeracy, personality, thinking styles, and knowledge) by multivariate analysis. Two focus group meetings with rheumatologists were held 6 months after the intervention to explore self-reported determinants. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by all rheumatologists and eight participated in the focus groups. Rheumatologists with more work experience and a less extravert personality ordered more ANA tests before the intervention [ß = 0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.003 to 0.02, p = 0.01 and ß = -0.11, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.01, p = 0.04, respectively; R2 = 47%]. After the intervention, female rheumatologists changed less than their male colleagues with regard to the number of ANA tests ordered (ß = 0.15, 95% CI 0.03-0.26, p = 0.02; R2 = 25%). During the focus groups, seven themes were identified that influenced improvement in ANA overuse: determinants related to the intervention and the study, individual health professionals, patients, professional interactions, incentives and resources, capacity for organizational change, and social, political, and legal factors. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several determinants that together explained a sizable part of the variance observed in the ANA outcomes at baseline and in the change in ANA outcomes afterwards. Furthermore, the focus groups yielded additional factors suggesting a complex interplay of determinants influencing rheumatologists' ANA ordering behaviour.

[Memorandum of the German Society for Rheumatology on the quality of treatment in rheumatology - Update 2016]. / Memorandum der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie zur Versorgungsqualität in der Rheumatologie ­ Update 2016.

On behalf of the Steering Committee of the German Society for Rheumatology, in 2016 the Interdisciplinary Commission on Healthcare Quality updated the 2008 memorandum on rheumatological healthcare in Germany. The update considers changes in therapeutic strategies, treatment targets as well as current structures in healthcare and the political framework. It concentrates on examination of the need for rheumatologists with a background in internal medicine and determines the gap between needs and supply. The internist rheumatologist is responsible for the care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and contributes to the care of patients with severe forms of other musculoskeletal diseases. At least 2 internist rheumatologists are needed for the outpatient care of 100,000 adult inhabitants, equivalent to 1350 rheumatologists in Germany. With currently 776 rheumatologists, we have little more than half of what we need. The German Society for Rheumatology calls for specific requirements planning for rheumatologists in outpatient care in order to decrease the deficit. In acute inpatient care we need specialized hospitals and wards that ensure a high quality of treatment for patients with complex diseases. We need up to 50 beds per 1 million inhabitants. At least 2 full-time internist rheumatologists and 3 further physicians are needed per 30 beds. In inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation we need 40 beds or outpatient places per 1 million inhabitants with at least 1 full-time rheumatologist and 1 further physician. In order to reduce the existing deficits and to cover the increasing future need for rheumatologists, more emphasis has to be laid on primary and secondary education. Chairs for internal rheumatology are needed at each medical university and more positions for postgraduate training in rheumatology should be provided. In all segments of healthcare the treatment aims should be jointly defined between patients and physicians. The patients should be treated in an interdisciplinary network, comprising other medical specialties, health professionals as well as patient organizations.

Rheumatologists and Ophthalmologists Differ in Treatment Decisions for Ocular Behçet Disease.

BACKGROUND: Ocular involvement in patients with Behçet disease represents a significant clinical morbidity in this disease, and the prevention of visual impairment is an important treatment goal. There are no randomized controlled trials for the treatment of ocular Behçet disease; however, clinicians must still make treatment decisions. OBJECTIVES: The goals of this study were to describe the treatment preferences of rheumatologists and ophthalmologists for the treatment of ocular Behçet disease and to identify factors that influence these decisions. METHODS: Eight hundred fifty-two rheumatologists and 934 ophthalmologists were surveyed via e-mail regarding their choice of therapy for a hypothetical patient with ocular Behçet disease. Respondents were asked to select first- and second-choice therapies and then reselect first and second choices assuming there would be no issues with cost or insurance prior authorization. RESULTS: One hundred thirty two physicians (7.4%) who were willing to recommend treatment completed the survey: 68 rheumatologists and 64 ophthalmologists. The most common first-choice therapy for both specialties was a biologic agent. Significantly more rheumatologists than ophthalmologists chose methotrexate (P < 0.025) and azathioprine (P < 0.005) as their first-choice therapy. After assuming there were no concerns with cost or prior authorization, rheumatologists were still more likely to choose azathioprine compared with ophthalmologists (P < 0.02), and ophthalmologists were more likely to choose local steroid implants (P < 0.02). Both rheumatologists and ophthalmologists increased their choice of an anti-tumor necrosis factor agent when cost and prior authorization issues were removed (P < 0.0001 and 0.008, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Physician decision making is influenced by medical specialty and concerns regarding cost and prior authorization.

Changes in the Workforce Characteristics of Providers Who Care for Adult Patients With Rheumatologic and Musculoskeletal Disease in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the adult rheumatology workforce in the United States, assess change in rheumatology providers over time, and identify variation in rheumatology practice characteristics. METHODS: Using national Medicare claims data from 2006 to 2020, clinically active rheumatology physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) were identified. Each calendar year was used for inclusion, exclusion, and analysis, and providers were determined to be entering, exiting, or stable based upon presence or absence in the prior or subsequent years of data. Characteristics (age, gender, practice type, rural, and region) of rheumatologists were determined for 2019 and in mutually exclusive study periods from 2009 to 2011, 2012 to 2015, and 2016 to 2019. The location of rheumatology practice was determined by billing tax identification and mapped. Demographics of physicians exiting or entering the rheumatology workforce were compared separately to those stable by logistic regression. RESULTS: The clinically active adult rheumatology workforce identified in US Medicare in 2019 was 5,667 rheumatologists and 379 APPs. From 2009 to 2020, the number of rheumatologists increased 23% and the number of APPs increased 141%. There was an increase in female rheumatologists over time, rising to 43% in 2019. Women and those employed by a health care system were more likely to exit, and those in a small practice or in the South were less likely to exit. CONCLUSION: The overall number of clinically active rheumatology providers grew more than 20% over the last decade to a high of 6,036 in 2020, although this rate of growth appears to be flattening off in later years.