Experiences of coordinated care for people in the UK affected by rare diseases: cross-sectional survey of patients, carers, and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Poorly coordinated care can have major impacts on patients and families affected by rare conditions, with negative physical health, psychosocial and financial consequences. This study aimed to understand how care is coordinated for rare diseases in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We undertook a national survey in the UK involving 760 adults affected by rare diseases, 446 parents/carers of people affected by rare diseases, and 251 healthcare professionals who care for people affected by rare diseases. RESULTS: Findings suggested that a wide range of patients, parents and carers do not have coordinated care. For example, few participants reported having a care coordinator (12% patients, 14% parents/carers), attending a specialist centre (32% patients, 33% parents/carers) or having a care plan (10% patients, 44% parents/carers). A very small number of patients (2%) and parents/carers (5%) had access to all three-a care coordinator, specialist centre and care plan. Fifty four percent of patients and 33% of parents/carers reported access to none of these. On the other hand, a higher proportion of healthcare professionals reported that families with rare conditions had access to care coordinators (35%), specialist centres (60%) and care plans (40%). CONCLUSIONS: Care for families with rare conditions is generally not well coordinated in the UK, with findings indicating limited access to care coordinators, specialist centres and care plans. Better understanding of these issues can inform how care coordination might be improved and embrace the needs and preferences of patients and families affected by rare conditions.

Developing a taxonomy of care coordination for people living with rare conditions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Improving care coordination is particularly important for individuals with rare conditions (who may experience multiple inputs into their care, across different providers and settings). To develop and evaluate strategies to potentially improve care coordination, it is necessary to develop a method for organising different ways of coordinating care for rare conditions. Developing a taxonomy would help to describe different ways of coordinating care and in turn facilitate development and evaluation of pre-existing and new models of care coordination for rare conditions. To the authors' knowledge, no studies have previously developed taxonomies of care coordination for rare conditions. This research aimed to develop and refine a care coordination taxonomy for people with rare conditions. METHODS: This study had a qualitative design and was conducted in the United Kingdom. To develop a taxonomy, six stages of taxonomy development were followed. We conducted interviews (n = 30 health care professionals/charity representatives/commissioners) and focus groups (n = 4 focus groups, 22 patients/carers with rare/ultra-rare/undiagnosed conditions). Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded with consent, and professionally transcribed. Findings were analysed using thematic analysis. Themes were used to develop a taxonomy, and to identify which types of coordination may work best in which situations. To refine the taxonomy, we conducted two workshops (n = 12 patients and carers group; n = 15 professional stakeholder group). RESULTS: Our taxonomy has six domains, each with different options. The six domains are: (1) Ways of organising care (local, hybrid, national), (2) Ways of organising those involved in care (collaboration between many or all individuals, collaboration between some individuals, a lack of collaborative approach), (3) Responsibility for coordination (administrative support, formal roles and responsibilities, supportive roles and no responsibility), (4) How often appointments and coordination take place (regular, on demand, hybrid), (5) Access to records (full or filtered access), and (6) Mode of care coordination (face-to-face, digital, telephone). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that there are different ways of coordinating care across the six domains outlined in our taxonomy. This may help to facilitate the development and evaluation of existing and new models of care coordination for people living with rare conditions.

Development of models of care coordination for rare conditions: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Improving care coordination for people with rare conditions may help to reduce burden on patients and carers and improve the care that patients receive. We recently developed a taxonomy of different ways of coordinating care for rare conditions. It is not yet known which models of care coordination are appropriate in different situations. This study aimed to: (1) explore what types of care coordination may be appropriate in different situations, and (2) use these findings to develop hypothetical models of care coordination for rare conditions. METHODS: To explore appropriateness of different types of care coordination, we conducted interviews (n = 30), four focus groups (n = 22) and two workshops (n = 27) with patients, carers, healthcare professionals, commissioners, and charity representatives. Participants were asked about preferences, benefits and challenges, and the factors influencing coordination. Thematic analysis was used to develop hypothetical models of care coordination. Models were refined following feedback from workshop participants. RESULTS: Stakeholders prefer models of care that: are nationally centralised or a hybrid of national and local care, involve professionals collaborating to deliver care, have clear roles and responsibilities outlined (including administrative, coordinator, clinical and charity roles), provide access to records and offer flexible appointments (in terms of timing and mode). Many factors influenced coordination, including those relating to the patient (e.g., condition complexity, patient's location and ability to coordinate their own care), the healthcare professional (e.g., knowledge and time), the healthcare environment (e.g., resources) and societal factors (e.g., availability of funding). We developed and refined ten illustrative hypothetical models of care coordination for rare conditions. CONCLUSION: Findings underline that different models of care coordination may be appropriate in different situations. It is possible to develop models of care coordination which are tailored to the individual in context. Findings may be used to facilitate planning around which models of care coordination may be appropriate in different services or circumstances. Findings may also be used by key stakeholders (e.g. patient organisations, clinicians and service planners) as a decision-making tool.

The power of patient-led global collaboration.

In late 2017, the global nonprofit, The Ehlers-Danlos Society (TEDS), was awarded a "Pipeline to Proposal" Tier A award from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). The goal of this application was to form a team of patients, researchers, other community support groups and stakeholders who are focused on establishing the Ehlers-Danlos Comorbidity Coalition to address the common health issues associated with this group of high morbidity, high disease burden conditions. The ongoing Coalition that is now funded by individual donors and expanding in its mission and members, is an example of successful collaboration spanning over borders and priorities.

Initial description and evaluation of EDS ECHO: An international effort to improve care for people with the Ehlers-Danlos syndromes and hypermobility spectrum disorders.

The Ehlers-Danlos Society Extension for Community Health Care Outcomes (EDS ECHO) is a portfolio of teleconferencing programs developed around the principles and practices of Project ECHO®, aimed at increasing awareness of Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDS) and hypermobility spectrum disorders (HSD) among clinicians, enhancing their confidence in the assessment and management of these complex conditions, and generating networks of clinicians across specialties. We assessed the outcomes of the first EDS ECHO program, launched in April 2019, with two hub locations: Indiana University Health, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA, and The Royal Society of Medicine, London, UK. Clinicians were surveyed before and 6 months after their participation. We describe the initial outcomes of the first four EDS ECHO programs, each comprising nine sessions. Participants reported increased levels of knowledge and confidence in providing care (93% and 95%, respectively) and an increase in referral network participation (65%). Additionally, 80% reported that their interest in EDS and HSD increased; 57% reporting a great increase. Also, 59% reported a decrease in feeling overwhelmed by EDS and HSD, and nearly half reported a decrease in their level of frustration because of participating in EDS ECHO. Clinicians participating in EDS ECHO programs know more, have more confidence in their ability to provide care, and feel energized by their participation.

How are patients with rare diseases and their carers in the UK impacted by the way care is coordinated? An exploratory qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Care coordination is considered important for patients with rare conditions, yet research addressing the impact of care coordination is limited. This study aimed to explore how care coordination (or lack of) impacts on patients and carers. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 patients and carers/parents in the UK, representing a range of rare conditions (including undiagnosed conditions). Transcripts were analysed thematically in an iterative process. RESULTS: Participants described a range of experiences and views in relation to care coordination. Reports of uncoordinated care emerged: appointments were uncoordinated, communication between key stakeholders was ineffective, patients and carers were required to coordinate their own care, and care was not coordinated to meet the changing needs of patients in different scenarios. As a result, participants experienced an additional burden and barriers/delays to accessing care. The impacts described by patients and carers, either attributed to or exacerbated by uncoordinated care, included: impact on physical health (including fatigue), financial impact (including loss of earnings and travel costs), and psychosocial impact (including disruption to school, work and emotional burden). Overall data highlight the importance of flexible care, which meets individual needs throughout patients'/carers' journeys. Specifically, study participants suggested that the impacts may be addressed by: having support from a professional to coordinate care, changing the approach of clinics and appointments (where they take place, which professionals/services are available and how they are scheduled), and improving communication through the use of technology, care plans, accessible points of contact and multi-disciplinary team working. CONCLUSION: This study provides further evidence of impacts of uncoordinated care; these may be complex and influenced by a number of factors. Approaches to coordination which improve access to care and lessen the time and burden placed on patients and carers may be particularly beneficial. Findings should influence future service developments (and the evaluation of such developments). This will be achieved, in the first instance, by informing the CONCORD Study in the UK.

Survey of Ehlers-Danlos Patients' ophthalmic surgery experiences.

BACKGROUND: Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) is a rare disease affecting approximately 1 in 5,000 people. Although ophthalmic conditions associated with EDS have been described, little data exist concerning ophthalmic surgical outcomes experienced by EDS patients. METHODS: Patients with EDS were surveyed via the EDS Society and asked about their ophthalmic surgical experiences including procedure, complications, and the timing with respect to receiving the EDS diagnosis. Complications were confirmed as such by subspecialists. RESULTS: Of 579 respondents, 467 reported confirmed EDS, and 112 of those had an ophthalmic procedure, including refractive surgery, cataract/lens surgery, retinal surgery, strabismus surgery, oculoplastic surgery, corneal surgery, and laser surgery for glaucoma. The rate of confirmed complications was: 23%-refractive, 33%-lens/cataract, 33%-retina, 59%-strabismus, 23%- oculoplastics, 0%-cornea, and 25%-glaucoma laser. In addition, 76% of patients underwent surgery prior to the EDS diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EDS may have elevated risk of postoperative ophthalmic surgical complications. It would seem reasonable to systemically and prospectively explore how patients with EDS respond to ophthalmic surgery. Furthermore, it would seem circumspect to ask surgical candidates patients about whether they carry a diagnosis of EDS or have signs and symptoms of EDS prior to surgery.

Assessment of the Information Sources and Interest in Research Collaboration Among Individuals with Vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered research requires active engagement of patients. The vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (vEDS) research collaborative was established to ascertain patient-centered vEDS research priorities and to engage affected individuals as research partners. Evaluation of access to information and interest in research among individuals with vEDS was the first step undertaken as part of this work. METHODS: A 28-question survey was created to evaluate 4 domains of interest: diagnostic and clinical care history, vEDS experience, information resources, and willingness to collaborate with researchers. The survey was created in REDCap™ and disseminated between January and April 2018 via the vEDS social media pages, blogs, and advocacy Web sites. Results were collated and described. A single open-ended question yielded additional narrative data, which were analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: Of the 300 responses, 228 (76%) were completed on behalf of oneself. The vEDS diagnosis was confirmed by genetic testing for 85% of respondents. When asked "Did a physician explain vEDS to you and how to manage it?" 25% answered no. Most had a primary care provider (65%), cardiologist (56%), and vascular surgeon (52%). Only 32% had a local vascular surgeon. The most commonly reported frustration was no cure/treatment available and the emergency rooms do not know what VEDS is (64.5% and 61.8%, respectively). The Internet was the most useful information source (62.3%) followed by a geneticist (18.4%). Most (87.7%) are willing to share their medical records for research studies (87.7%) and wished to be contacted about future studies (83.8%); however, only 65.4% would be willing to upload medical records via a secure confidential Web application. The most common reason for interest in research partnership was to advance research for a treatment/cure (83.8%) and helping others learn from their experiences (82.9%). The qualitative analysis provided additional insights into the patient experience living with vEDS. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with vEDS, there is substantial frustration with the lack of treatment, lack of knowledge among health care providers, and a high degree of interest in research involvement. The survey highlights an opportunity to discuss the optimal modality for research participation and methodologies for building trust in the research teams. The methodology lessons learned can also be applied to other rare vascular diseases.

The international consortium on the Ehlers-Danlos syndromes.

Since 1998, two developments have led to concerns that the EDS nosology needs to be substantially revised. The first development was the clinical and molecular characterization of several new EDS variants, which substantially broadened the molecular basis underlying EDS. The second was the growing concern, in the absence of genetic diagnosis, that the hypermobile type of EDS had an expanded phenotype, may be genetically heterogeneous, and that the diagnostic criteria currently in use were inadequate. Furthermore, there is a dire need for the development of guidelines for management for each type of EDS to allow both the specialist and the generalist to care for affected individuals and their families. We have been meeting together as an international consortium over the past 2 years to establish these new criteria and management and care guidelines © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The 2017 international classification of the Ehlers-Danlos syndromes.

The Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDS) are a clinically and genetically heterogeneous group of heritable connective tissue disorders (HCTDs) characterized by joint hypermobility, skin hyperextensibility, and tissue fragility. Over the past two decades, the Villefranche Nosology, which delineated six subtypes, has been widely used as the standard for clinical diagnosis of EDS. For most of these subtypes, mutations had been identified in collagen-encoding genes, or in genes encoding collagen-modifying enzymes. Since its publication in 1998, a whole spectrum of novel EDS subtypes has been described, and mutations have been identified in an array of novel genes. The International EDS Consortium proposes a revised EDS classification, which recognizes 13 subtypes. For each of the subtypes, we propose a set of clinical criteria that are suggestive for the diagnosis. However, in view of the vast genetic heterogeneity and phenotypic variability of the EDS subtypes, and the clinical overlap between EDS subtypes, but also with other HCTDs, the definite diagnosis of all EDS subtypes, except for the hypermobile type, relies on molecular confirmation with identification of (a) causative genetic variant(s). We also revised the clinical criteria for hypermobile EDS in order to allow for a better distinction from other joint hypermobility disorders. To satisfy research needs, we also propose a pathogenetic scheme, that regroups EDS subtypes for which the causative proteins function within the same pathway. We hope that the revised International EDS Classification will serve as a new standard for the diagnosis of EDS and will provide a framework for future research purposes. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.