Intended and unintended consequences of strategies to meet performance benchmarks for rheumatologist referrals in a centralized intake system.

RATIONALE: Timely assessment of a chronic condition is critical to prevent long-term irreversible consequences. Patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) symptoms require diagnosis by a rheumatologist and intervention initiation to minimize potential joint damage. With limited rheumatologist capacity, meeting urgency wait time benchmarks can be challenging. We investigate the impact of the maximum wait time guarantee (MWTG) policy and referral volume changes in a rheumatology central intake (CI) system on meeting this challenge. METHODS: We applied a system simulation approach to model a high-volume CI rheumatology clinic. Model parameters were based on the referral and triage data from the CI and clinic appointment data. We compare the wait time performance of the current distribution policy MWTG and when referral volumes change. RESULTS: The MWTG policy ensures 100% of new patients see a rheumatologist within their urgency wait time benchmark. However, the average wait time for new patients increased by 51% (178-269 days). A 10% decrease in referrals resulted in a 76% decrease on average wait times (178-43 days) for new patients and an increase in the number of patients seen by a rheumatologist within 1 year of the initial visit. CONCLUSION: An MWTG policy can result in intended and unintended consequences-ensuring that all patients meet the wait time benchmarks but increasing wait times overall. Relatively small changes in referral volume significantly impact wait times. These relationships can assist clinic managers and policymakers decide on the best approach to manage referrals for better system performance.

Improving Appropriate Access to Care With Central Referral and Triage in Rheumatology.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term and long-term impact of a centralized system for the intake and triage of rheumatology referrals on access to care and referral quality. METHODS: An innovative central referral process, the Central Referral and Triage in Rheumatology (CReATe Rheum) program, was implemented in 2006, serving a referral base of 2 million people. Referrals are received in a central office, triaged by trained nurses, and assigned to the next available appointment on a prioritized basis. To evaluate the short-term impact, we compared wait times, duplicate referrals, and no-shows from a pre-implementation practice audit to a 2-year post-implementation evaluation (January 2007 to December 2008). Rheumatologists also assessed the quality and completeness of the referral information and accuracy of the urgency category assigned during triage. We evaluated the long-term impact by tracking referral volume, wait times, and rheumatologist manpower each year until December, 2013. RESULTS: During the first 2 years, wait-time variability between rheumatologists decreased, and wait times were reduced for moderate and urgent referrals. CReATe Rheum improved the quality of referral information and eliminated duplicate referrals. The urgency of the referral was assigned correctly in 90% of referrals. Over the long term, CReATe Rheum maintained short wait times for more urgent patients despite a growing number of referrals and a stable number of rheumatologists. CONCLUSION: A centralized system for the intake and triage of rheumatology referrals improved referral quality, reduced system inefficiencies, and effectively managed wait times on a prioritized basis for a large referral population.

Clinical and serological analysis of patients with positive anticyclic citrullinated Peptide antibodies referred through a Rheumatology Central Triage System.

OBJECTIVE: Anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) are a highly specific and sensitive biomarker for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Some patients who were found to have a positive ACPA test were referred to our Rheumatology Central Triage (CT; Calgary, Alberta, Canada) for assessment by a rheumatologist. The objectives of our study were to determine the clinical accuracy of ACPA in establishing a diagnosis of RA in a real-time clinical setting. METHODS: Cases that met 3 criteria were included in the study: (1) referred to the CT over 3 calendar years (n = 20,389), (2) reason for referral was a positive ACPA test (n = 568), and (3) evaluated by a certified rheumatologist (n = 314). An administrative serological database was used to retrieve specific ACPA results. RESULTS: Of patients referred through our CT for evaluation of a positive ACPA test, 57.6% received a diagnosis of RA; the remainder had a variety of other diagnoses, some of which might be considered early RA (9%). The predictive values of ACPA for the diagnosis of RA were increased when rheumatoid factor (RF) results were included in the analysis. When definite and possible RA were combined and the prevalence of moderate/high ACPA was compared to all other individuals, the positive and negative predictive values for moderate/high ACPA for RA were 74.3% and 68.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: About 58% of patients with a positive ACPA referred through a triage system for a rheumatologist opinion received a diagnosis of RA at their first visit. RF provides additional useful information to guide the diagnosis and urgency of referral.

Clinical and serological features of patients referred through a rheumatology triage system because of positive antinuclear antibodies.

BACKGROUND: The referral of patients with positive anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) tests has been criticized as an inappropriate use of medical resources. The utility of a positive ANA test in a central triage (CT) system was studied by determining the autoantibody profiles and clinical diagnoses of patients referred to rheumatologists through a CT system because of a positive ANA test. METHODS: Patients that met three criteria were included: (1) referred to Rheumatology CT over a three year interval; (2) reason for referral was a "positive ANA"; (3) were evaluated by a certified rheumatologist. The CT clinical database was used to obtain demographic and clinical information and a serological database was used to retrieve specific ANA and/or extractable nuclear antigen (ENA) test results. Clinical information was extracted from the consulting rheumatologist's report. RESULTS: 15,357 patients were referred through the CT system; 643 (4.1%) of these because of a positive ANA and of these 263 (40.9%) were evaluated by a certified rheumatologist. In 63/263 (24%) of ANA positive patients, the specialist provided a diagnosis of an ANA associated rheumatic disease (AARD) while 69 (26.2%) had no evidence of any disease; 102 (38.8%) had other rheumatologic diagnoses and 29 (11%) had conditions that did not meet AARD classification criteria. Of ANA positive archived sera, 15.1% were anti-DFS70 positive and 91.2% of these did not have an AARD. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate the serological and clinical features of patients referred through a CT system because of a positive ANA. The spectrum of autoantibody specificities was wide with anti-Ro52/TRIM21 being the most common autoantibody detected. Approximately 15% of referrals had only antibodies to DFS70, the vast majority of which did not have clinical evidence for an AARD. These findings provide insight into the utility of autoantibody testing in a CT system.

The nurse's role in addressing unmet treatment and management needs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Delphi-based recommendations.

PURPOSE: Evaluate nurse's role in management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Modified Delphi with two rounds of questionnaires, followed by in-person meeting. International group of 12 nurses experienced with RA patients receiving biologic therapy. FINDINGS: Nurses often spend more time with patients than doctors do. Nurse is in unique position to explore patient needs; educate about treatment, administration, product storage, and self-injection technique; determine readiness for and understanding of treatment; monitor safety and progress; and coordinate care within multidisciplinary setting. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse's role is complex and vitally important to optimal RA patient care. Additional nurse involvement may address unmet needs. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Rheumatology nurses can address unmet patient needs by expanding current roles and by adopting additional functions.

The Nurse's Role in Addressing Unmet Treatment and Management Needs of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Delphi-Based Recommendations.

PURPOSE: Evaluate nurse's role in management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Modified Delphi with two rounds of questionnaires, followed by in-person meeting. International group of 12 nurses experienced with RA patients receiving biologic therapy. FINDINGS: Nurses often spend more time with patients than doctors do. Nurse is in unique position to explore patient needs; educate about treatment, administration, product storage, and self-injection technique; determine readiness for and understanding of treatment; monitor safety and progress; and coordinate care within multidisciplinary setting. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse's role is complex and vitally important to optimal RA patient care. Additional nurse involvement may address unmet needs. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Rheumatology nurses can address unmet patient needs by expanding current roles and by adopting additional functions.

Office capillaroscopy in systemic sclerosis.

The aims of this study are to assess the reliability of two office techniques, the ophthalmoscope and the Dermlite dermatoscope, and to detect nailfold capillaroscopy abnormalities in systemic sclerosis (SSc). Two separate studies were performed. In the first, the nailfolds of two fingers on one hand of 13 SSc patients and two normals were examined by four rheumatologists using an ophthalmoscope. In the second, the nailfolds of the two fingers of each hand of six SSc patients and two normals were examined by six rheumatologists with a Dermlite dermatoscope. Widefield capillary microscopy was performed by one observer in the ophthalmoscope study to assess validity. The examiners determined the presence or absence of dilated loops, giant capillary loops, and/or avascular areas on each digit. The kappa coefficient was calculated to demonstrate agreement. With the ophtalmoscope, the inter-observer kappa coefficients were 0.43, 0.54, and 0.19; the average intra-observer agreements were 0.61, 0.56, and 0.31; and the ophthalmoscope-microscope agreement were 0.63, 0.52, and <0.1 for dilated capillaries, giant capillaries, and avascular areas, respectively. With the dermatoscope, the kappa values for inter-observer reliability were 0.63, 0.40, and 0.20; and intra-observer reliability was 0.71, 0.55, and 0.40 for dilated capillaries, giant capillaries, and avascular areas, respectively. The ophthalmoscope and the dermatoscope provide moderate to substantial reliability to detect the presence of giant and dilated capillaries but poor inter-observer agreement for avascular areas. The ophthalmoscope is valid when compared to the microscope for detecting giant or dilated capillaries. We conclude that these techniques are useful office tools to detect capillary abnormalities in SSc.