Rheumatology High Blood Pressure Protocol Reduces Disparities, But Delays Remain for External Primary Care.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: To address high blood pressure (BP) in rheumatology patients, we previously implemented BP Connect, a brief staff-driven protocol to address high BP. Although timely follow-up and hypertension rates improved for patients with in-system primary care (PC), many receive PC and rheumatology care in separate health systems. In this cohort study, we compared rates of timely PC follow-up for high BP across-system health maintenance organizations (HMOs) before and after BP Connect implementation. METHODS: All adult patients with high rheumatology clinic BP and PC in that HMO were eligible. BP Connect's protocol engaged the staff in remeasuring high BP (≥140/90 mm Hg), advising cardiovascular disease risk, and connecting timely PC follow-up, which for patients with PC across system includes written follow-up instructions. After an eligible rheumatology visit, the next HMO PC visit with BP was used to determine rates and odds of timely follow-up before and after using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Across 1327 rheumatology visits with high BP and across-system PC (2013-2019), 951 occurred after 2015 BP Connect implementation; 400 had confirmed high BP. Primary care follow-up rose from 20.5% to 23.5%. The odds of timely PC BP follow-up insignificantly changed (odds ratio, 1.19; confidence interval, 0.85-1.68). For visits with Black patients, the odds of timely follow-up did significantly increase (1.95; confidence interval, 1.02-3.79). CONCLUSIONS: Timely follow-up for Black patients did improve, highlighting protocol interventions for more equitable health care. In contrast to our prior in-system study, BP Connect did not significantly improve follow-up with an across-system PC, indicating a need for direct scheduling. Future directions include piloting direct across-system scheduling.

Clarifying misbeliefs about hydroxychloroquine (HCQ): developing the HCQ benefits versus harm decision aid (HCQ-SAFE) per low health literacy standards.

BACKGROUND: Up to 83% of patients with SLE stop taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) within the first year due to knowledge gaps regarding the survival benefits of HCQ versus inflated fears of rare toxicity. Thus, there is a need for a shared decision-making tool that highlights HCQ's significant benefits versus rare harms to improve patients' understanding and align treatments with their values. The objective of this study was to describe development and piloting of a decision aid (HCQ-SAFE) to facilitate HCQ adherence, and safe, effective use by engaging patients in therapeutic decision-making. METHODS: HCQ-SAFE was developed via a collaborative process involving patients, clinicians, implementation scientists and health literacy experts. The initial prototype was informed by Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) low literacy principles and key themes about HCQ use from six prior patient and clinician focus groups, with iterative expert and stakeholder feedback to deliver a final prototype. We implemented HCQ-SAFE in four clinics to examine usability and feasibility on Likert scales (0-7) and net promoter score (0%-100%). RESULTS: The final HCQ-SAFE shared decision-making laminated tool organises data using pictograms showing how HCQ use reduces risk of organ damage, early death and blood clots versus low risk of eye toxicity.HCQ-SAFE was reviewed in all eligible patient visits (n=40) across four clinics on an average of ~8 min, including 25% non-English-speaking patients. All patients scored 100% on the knowledge post-test; no decisional conflicts were noted after using HCQ-SAFE. HCQ-SAFE garnered high clinician and patient satisfaction with 100% likelihood to recommend to peers. CONCLUSIONS: HCQ-SAFE is a stakeholder-informed feasible shared decision-making tool that enhances communication and can potentially improve knowledge, clarify misbeliefs and engage patients in treatment decisions, including those with limited English proficiency.

The Development of the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness Learning Collaborative for Improving Patient-Reported Outcome Collection and Patient-Centered Communication in Adult Rheumatology.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an integral part of treat-to-target approaches in managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In clinical practice, however, routine collection, documentation, and discussion of PROs with patients are highly variable. The RISE LC (Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness Learning Collaborative) was established to develop and share best practices in PRO collection and use across adult rheumatology practices in the United States METHODS: The goals of the RISE LC were developed through site surveys and in-person meetings. Participants completed a baseline survey on PRO collection and use in their practices. RISE LC learning sessions focused on improving communication around PROs with patients and enhancing shared decision-making in treatment plans. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the RISE LC pivoted to adapt PRO tools for telehealth. RESULTS: At baseline, all responding sites (n = 15) had established workflows for collecting PROs. Most sites used paper forms alone. PRO documentation in electronic health records was variable, with only half of the sites using structured data fields. To standardize and improve the use of PROs, participants iteratively developed a Clinical Disease Activity Index-based RA Disease Activity Communication Tool to solicit treatment goals and improve shared decision-making across sites. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated developing a tool to gauge PROs via telehealth. CONCLUSION: The RISE LC is a continuous, structured method for implementing strategies to improve PRO collection and use in rheumatological care, initially adapting from the Learning Collaborative model and extending to include features of a learning network. Future directions include measuring the impact of standardized PRO collection and discussion on shared decision-making and RA outcomes.

Contribution of Socioeconomic Status to Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes Among Women With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: We examined rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) by race/ethnicity among women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), with and without antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL), and whether socioeconomic status (SES) accounted for differences. METHODS: Data were from the PROMISSE (Predictors of Pregnancy Outcome: Biomarkers in Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus) study, a multicenter study that enrolled 346 patients with SLE and 62 patients with SLE and aPL (50% white, 20% African American, 17% Hispanic, 12% Asian/Pacific Islander). Measures of SES were educational attainment, median community income, and community education. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine odds of APO for each racial/ethnic group, controlling first for age and clinical variables, and then for SES. RESULTS: The frequency of APO in white women with SLE, with and without aPL, was 29% and 11%, respectively. For African American and Hispanic women it was approximately 2-fold greater. In African American women with SLE alone, adjustment for clinical variables attenuated the odds ratio (OR) from 2.7 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.3-5.5) to 2.3 (95% CI 1.1-5.1), and after additional adjustment for SES, there were no longer significant differences in APO compared to whites. In contrast, in SLE patients with aPL, whites, African Americans, and Hispanics had markedly higher risks of APO compared to white SLE patients without aPL (OR 3.5 [95% CI 1.4-7.7], OR 12.4 [95% CI 1.9-79.8], and OR 10.4 [95% CI 2.5-42.4], respectively), which were not accounted for by clinical or SES covariates. CONCLUSION: This finding suggests that for African American women with SLE without aPL, SES factors are key contributors to disparities in APO, despite monthly care from experts, whereas other factors contribute to disparities in SLE with aPL.

Patient Perspectives in OMERACT Provide an Anchor for Future Metric Development and Improved Approaches to Healthcare Delivery in Connective Tissue Disease Related Interstitial Lung Disease (CTD-ILD).

OBJECTIVE: The impact and natural history of connective tissue disease related interstitial lung disease (CTD-ILD) are poorly understood; and have not been previously described from the patient's perspective. This investigation sought insight into CTD-ILD from the patients' perspective to add to our knowledge of CTD-ILD, identify disease-specific areas of unmet need and gather potentially meaningful information towards development of disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: A mixed methods design incorporating patient focus groups (FGs) querying disease progression and life impact followed by questionnaires with items of importance generated by >250 ILD specialists were implemented among CTD-ILD patients with rheumatoid arthritis, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, systemic sclerosis, and other CTD subtypes. FG data were analyzed through inductive analysis with five independent analysts, including a patient research partner. Questionnaires were analyzed through Fisher's Exact tests and hierarchal cluster analysis. RESULTS: Six multicenter FGs included 45 patients. Biophysiologic themes were cough and dyspnea, both pervasively impacting health related quality of life (HRQoL). Language indicating dyspnea was unexpected, unique and contextual. Psycho-social themes were Living with Uncertainty, Struggle over Self-Identity, and Self-Efficacy - with education and clinician communication strongly emphasised. All questionnaire items were rated 'moderately' to 'extremely' important with 10 items of highest importance identified by cluster analysis. CONCLUSION: Patients with CTD-ILD informed our understanding of symptoms and impact on HRQoL. Cough and dyspnea are central to the CTD-ILD experience. Initial FGs have provided disease-specific content, context and language essential for reliable PROM development with questionnaires adding value in recognition of patients' concerns.