Estimation of the burden of shielding among a cross-section of patients attending rheumatology clinics with SLE-data from the BSR audit of systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to estimate what proportion of people with SLE attending UK rheumatology clinics would be categorized as being at high risk from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and therefore asked to shield, and explore what implications this has for rheumatology clinical practice. METHODS: We used data from the British Society for Rheumatology multicentre audit of SLE, which included a large, representative cross-sectional sample of patients attending UK Rheumatology clinics with SLE. We calculated who would receive shielding advice using the British Society for Rheumatology's risk stratification guidance and accompanying scoring grid, and assessed whether ethnicity and history of nephritis were over-represented in the shielding group. RESULTS: The audit included 1003 patients from 51 centres across all 4 nations of the UK. Overall 344 (34.3%) patients had a shielding score ≥3 and would have been advised to shield. People with previous or current LN were 2.6 (1.9-3.4) times more likely to be in the shielding group than people with no previous LN (P < 0.001). Ethnicity was not evenly distributed between the groups (chi-squared P < 0.001). Compared with White people, people of Black ethnicity were 1.9 (1.3-2.8) and Asian 1.9 (1.3-2.7) times more likely to be in the shielding group. Increased risk persisted after controlling for LN. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates the large number of people with SLE who are likely to be shielding. Implications for clinical practice include considering communication across language and cultural differences, and ways to conduct renal assessment including urinalysis, during telephone and video consultations for patients who are shielding.

BSR guideline on the management of adults with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) 2018: baseline multi-centre audit in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the baseline care provided to patients with SLE attending UK Rheumatology units, audited against standards derived from the recently published BSR guideline for the management of adults with SLE, the NICE technology appraisal for belimumab, and NHS England's clinical commissioning policy for rituximab. METHODS: SLE cases attending outpatient clinics during any 4-week period between February and June 2018 were retrospectively audited to assess care at the preceding visit. The effect of clinical environment (general vs dedicated CTD/vasculitis clinic and specialized vs non-specialized centre) were tested. Bonferroni's correction was applied to the significance level. RESULTS: Fifty-one units participated. We audited 1021 episodes of care in 1003 patients (median age 48 years, 74% diagnosed >5 years ago). Despite this disease duration, 286 (28.5%) patients had active disease. Overall in 497 (49%) clinic visits, it was recorded that the patient was receiving prednisolone, including in 28.5% of visits where disease was assessed as inactive. Low documented compliance (<60% clinic visits) was identified for audit standards relating to formal disease-activity assessment, reduction of drug-related toxicity and protection against comorbidities and damage. Compared with general clinics, dedicated clinics had higher compliance with standards for appropriate urine protein quantification (85.1% vs 78.1%, P ≤ 0.001). Specialized centres had higher compliance with BILAG Biologics Register recruitment (89.4% vs 44.4%, P ≤ 0.001) and blood pressure recording (95.3% vs 84.1%). CONCLUSIONS: This audit highlights significant unmet need for better disease control and reduction in corticosteroid toxicity and is an opportunity to improve compliance with national guidelines. Higher performance with nephritis screening in dedicated clinics supports wider adoption of this service-delivery model.

Management of gout by UK rheumatologists: a British Society for Rheumatology national audit.

Objectives: To assess the concordance of gout management by UK rheumatologists with evidence-based best-practice recommendations. Methods: Data were collected on patients newly referred to UK rheumatology out-patient departments over an 8-week period. Baseline data included demographics, method of diagnosis, clinical features, comorbidities, urate-lowering therapy (ULT), prophylaxis and blood tests. Twelve months later, the most recent serum uric acid level was collected. Management was compared with audit standards derived from the 2006 EULAR recommendations, 2007 British Society for Rheumatology/British Health Professionals in Rheumatology guideline and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence febuxostat technology appraisal. Results: Data were collected for 434 patients from 91 rheumatology departments (mean age 59.8 years, 82% male). Diagnosis was crystal-proven in 13%. Of 106 taking a diuretic, this was reduced/stopped in 29%. ULT was continued/initiated in 76% of those with one or more indication for ULT. One hundred and fifty-eight patients started allopurinol: the starting dose was most commonly 100 mg daily (82%); in those with estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min the highest starting dose was 100 mg daily. Of 199 who started ULT, prophylaxis was co-prescribed for 94%. Fifty patients started a uricosuric or febuxostat: 84% had taken allopurinol previously. Of 44 commenced on febuxostat, 18% had a history of heart disease. By 12 months, serum uric acid levels ⩽360 and <300 µmol/l were achieved by 45 and 25%, respectively. Conclusion: Gout management by UK rheumatologists concords well with guidelines for most audit standards. However, fewer than half of patients achieved a target serum uric level over 12 months. Rheumatologists should help ensure that ULT is optimized to achieve target serum uric acid levels to benefit patients.

Patient- and clinician-reported outcomes for patients with new presentation of inflammatory arthritis: observations from the National Clinical Audit for Rheumatoid and Early Inflammatory Arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to conduct a national audit assessing the impact and experience of early management of inflammatory arthritis by English and Welsh rheumatology units. The audit enables rheumatology services to measure for the first time their performance, patient outcomes and experience, benchmarked to regional and national comparators. METHODS: All individuals >16 years of age presenting to English and Welsh rheumatology services with suspected new-onset inflammatory arthritis were included in the audit. Clinician- and patient-derived outcome and patient-reported experience measures were collected. RESULTS: Data are presented for the 6354 patients recruited from 1 February 2014 to 31 January 2015. Ninety-seven per cent of English and Welsh trusts participated. At the first specialist assessment, the 28-joint DAS (DAS28) was calculated for 2659 (91%) RA patients [mean DAS28 was 5.0 and mean Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID) score was 5.6]. After 3 months of specialist care, the mean DAS28 was 3.5 and slightly >60% achieved a meaningful DAS28 reduction. The average RAID score and reduction in RAID score were 3.6 and 2.4, respectively. Of the working patients ages 16-65 years providing data, 7, 5, 16 and 37% reported that they were unable to work, needed frequent time off work, occasionally and rarely needed time off work due to their arthritis, respectively; only 42% reported being asked about their work. Seventy-eight per cent of RA patients providing data agreed with the statement 'Overall in the last 3 months I have had a good experience of care for my arthritis'; <2% disagreed. CONCLUSION: This audit demonstrates that most RA patients have severe disease at the time of presentation to rheumatology services and that a significant number continue to have high disease activity after 3 months of specialist care. There is a clear need for the National Health Service to develop better systems for capturing, coding and integrating information from outpatient clinics, including measures of patient experience and outcome and measures of ability to work.

Achievement of NICE quality standards for patients with new presentation of inflammatory arthritis: observations from the National Clinical Audit for Rheumatoid and Early Inflammatory Arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: A national audit was performed assessing the early management of suspected inflammatory arthritis by English and Welsh rheumatology units. The aim of this audit was to measure the performance of rheumatology services against National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) quality standards (QSs) for the management of early inflammatory arthritis benchmarked to regional and national comparators for the first time in the UK. METHODS: All individuals >16 years of age presenting to rheumatology services in England and Wales with suspected new-onset inflammatory arthritis were included in the audit. Information was collected against six NICE QSs that pertain to early inflammatory arthritis management. RESULTS: We present national data for the 6354 patients recruited from 1 February 2014 to 31 January 2015; 97% of trusts and health boards in England and Wales participated in this audit. Only 17% of patients were referred by their general practitioner within 3 days of first presentation. Specialist rheumatology assessment occurred within 3 weeks of referral in 38% of patients. The target of DMARD initiation within 6 weeks of referral was achieved in 53% of RA patients; 36% were treated with combination DMARDs and 82% with steroids within the first 3 months of specialist care. Fifty-nine per cent of patients received structured education on their arthritis within 1 month of diagnosis. In total, 91% of patients had a treatment target set; the agreed target was achieved within 3 months of specialist review in only 27% of patients. Access to urgent advice via a telephone helpline was reported to be available in 96% of trusts. CONCLUSION: The audit has highlighted gaps between NICE standards and delivery of care, as well as substantial geographic variability.

Identifying rheumatic disease patients at high risk and requiring shielding during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Rheumatology teams care for patients with diverse, systemic autoimmune diseases who are often immunosuppressed and at high risk of infections. The current COVID-19 pandemic has presented particular challenges in caring for and managing this patient group. The office of the chief medical officer (CMO) for England contacted the rheumatology community to provide expert advice on the identification of extremely vulnerable patients at very high risk during the COVID-19 pandemic who should be 'shielded'. This involves the patients being asked to strictly self-isolate for at least 12 weeks with additional funded support provided for them to remain at home. A group of rheumatologists (the authors) have devised a pragmatic guide to identifying the very highest risk group using a rapidly developed scoring system which went live simultaneous with the Government announcement on shielding and was cascaded to all rheumatologists working in England.