How do patient reported outcome measures affect treatment intensification and patient satisfaction in the management of psoriatic arthritis? A cross sectional study of 503 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The ASSIST study investigated prescribing in routine psoriatic arthritis (PsA) care and whether the patient reported outcome: PsA Impact of Disease questionnaire (PsAID-12), impacted treatment. This study also assessed a range of patient and clinician factors and their relationship to PsAID-12 scoring and treatment modification. METHODS: Patients with PsA were selected across the UK and Europe between July 2021-March 2022. Patients completed the PsAID questionnaire, with the results shared with their physician. Patient characteristics, disease activity, current treatment methods, treatment strategies, medication changes and patient satisfaction scores were recorded. RESULTS: 503 patients recruited. 36.2% had changes made to treatment, 88.8% of this had treatment escalation. Overall, the mean PsAID-12 score was higher for patients with treatment escalation; the PsAID-12 score was associated with odds of treatment escalation (OR: 1.58; p< 0.0001). However, most clinicians reported PsAID-12 did not impact their decision to escalate treatment, instead supporting treatment reduction decisions. Physician's assessment of disease activity had the most statistically significant effect on likelihood of treatment escalation, (OR = 2.68, per 1-point score increase). Escalation was more likely in patients not treated with biologic therapies. Additional factors associated with treatment escalation included: patient characteristics, physician characteristics, disease activity and disease impact. CONCLUSION: This study highlights multiple factors impacting treatment decision making for individuals with PsA. PsAID-12 scoring correlates with multiple measures of disease severity and odds of treatment escalation. However, most clinicians reported the PsAID-12 did not influence treatment escalation decisions. PsAID scoring could be used to increase confidence in treatment de-escalation.

What does competently delivered neuropsychological assessment feedback look like? Development and validation of a competency evaluation tool.

Objective: Neuropsychological assessment (NP) feedback helps patients and caregivers understand assessment results to maximise their utility and impact in everyday life. Yet feedback practices are inconsistent and there are no evidence-based guidelines for how feedback should be most effectively delivered. The aim of our study was to develop a psychometrically sound feedback competency checklist, the Psychology Competency Assessment Tool - Feedback (PsyCET-F), for use in research, training, and clinical settings. Method: The Delphi method of expert consensus was used to establish checklist items that clearly described competencies important for NP feedback. To examine the inter-rater reliability of the checklist, two experienced neuropsychologists rated the competencies demonstrated by trainee neuropsychologists across four feedback sessions. Results: After two Delphi rounds, consensus was reached on the 20-item checklist. Consensus was defined as at least 80% agreement amongst the panel of 20 experts. Four item categories resulted from the Delphi: (a) Opening the Session; (b) Applying Specific Feedback Techniques; (c) Engagement, Collaboration, and Alliance; and (d) Structuring and Ending the Session. Inter-rater reliability was moderate (κW = 0.79, p <.001, 80.52% agreement) when using a simple coding system, coded as Beginner, Intermediate, Competent, and Skilful; and strong (κW = 0.82, p <.001) when competency level was coded using an 8-point, detailed coding method. Conclusions: The PsyCET-F is psychometrically sound and fit-for-purpose for measuring competencies in giving NP feedback. It can be used in the training of clinicians to develop effective feedback skills. International benchmarking and usability testing will be conducted in a future study.

An international multi-centre analysis of current prescribing practices and shared decision-making in psoriatic arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision-making (SDM) is advocated to improve patient outcomes in Psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We analysed current prescribing practices and the extent of SDM in PsA across Europe. METHODS: The ASSIST study was a cross-sectional observational study of PsA patients aged ≥18 years attending face-to-face appointments between July 2021-March 2022. Patient demographics, current treatment and treatment decisions were recorded. SDM was measured by the clinician's effort to collaborate (CollaboRATE questionnaire) and patient communication confidence (PEPPI-5 tool). RESULTS: 503 patients were included from 24 centres across the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Physician- and patient-reported measures of disease activity were highest in the UK. Conventional synthetic DMARDs constituted a higher percentage of current PsA treatment in UK than continental Europe (66.4% vs 44.9%), which differed from biologic DMARDs (36.4% vs 64.4%). Implementing treatment escalation was most common in the UK. CollaboRATE and PEPPI-5 scores were high across centres. Of 31 patients with low CollaboRATE scores (<4.5), no patients with low PsAID-12 scores (<5) had treatment escalation. However, of 465 patients with CollaboRATE scores ≥4.5, 59 patients with low PsAID-12 scores received treatment escalation. CONCLUSIONS: Higher rates of treatment escalation seen in the UK may be explained by higher disease activity and a younger cohort. High levels of collaboration in face-to-face PsA consultations suggests effective implementation of the SDM approach. Our data indicate that, in patients with mild disease activity, only those with higher perceived collaboration underwent treatment escalation. Prospective studies should examine the impact of SDM on PsA patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05171270.

Clinical associations with carriage of pulmonary Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.

BACKGROUND: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia causes opportunistic respiratory infections and is associated with declining lung function in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). Risk factors for carrying S. maltophilia remain unclear. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients yielding ⩾1 respiratory S. maltophilia isolate at the Oxford University Hospitals Trust between 2014 and 2019 and a cohort study of S. maltophilia carriage in CF patients attending annual review in 2018. RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty isolates were identified from 238 patients (median 1.0 isolate/patient). Predisposing conditions included invasive ventilation (29.8%), CF (25.6%) and non-CF bronchiectasis (24.4%). The rates of Stenotrophomonas isolates and co-trimoxazole resistance were stable over time. About 10.8% of isolates were co-trimoxazole-resistant, with resistance more common in CF than in other diagnoses (29.5% vs 5.8%, p < 0.001). No clinical features were significantly associated with S. maltophilia carriage in the CF population. DISCUSSION: We present new insight into the epidemiology of Stenotrophomonas colonisation/infection and identify increased co-trimoxazole resistance in CF isolates.