RESUMO
Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic necessitated novel health care delivery for patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD), including reduced in-person appointments and physiologic testing to minimize transmission. Clinicians often have been required to rely on patients' subjective assessments of their clinical status during phone follow-up appointments. It is unknown how accurate a patient's self-assessment is compared with that of their physician during an in-person evaluation. Research Question: Are patients' self-assessments of their clinical status in agreement with their physicians' assessments, and are telemedicine vs in-person visits acceptable? Study Design and Methods: Patients were enrolled prospectively from the University of Calgary ILD clinic. Participants were asked by phone before the in-person appointment and after the appointment to rate their clinical status on a five-point Likert scale. Physicians then rated the patient's clinical status after the appointment on a similar five-point Likert scale, masked to patient responses. Patients and physicians were asked if an in-person appointment was necessary or if telemedicine would have sufficed. Clinical variables associated with physician assessments were assessed. Results: Fifty patients with mean age of 67 ± 11.8 years participated. Mean time since last follow-up was 5.0 ± 3.0 months. No correlation was found between the preclinical patient self-assessment and postclinical physician assessment (P = .18; κ = 0.28). Correlation of postclinical assessment was statistically significant (P < .001), with moderate agreement (κ = 0.49). Physicians thought telephone visits were acceptable for 58% of appointments, whereas only 12% of patients preferred telephone visits. Physician's assessment of clinical status seemed to be driven by change in diffusion capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (P = .039). Interpretation: Telemedicine may improve access to care for patients during pandemic management, in rural communities, and for those with impaired mobility. Despite these benefits, our data support that patients and physicians may not agree on determination of clinical status and that patients generally prefer in-person patient-physician interactions.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a frequent manifestation of connective tissue disease (CTD) with substantial variability in prevalence and outcomes reported across CTD subtypes. This systematic review summarises the prevalence, risk factors and ILD patterns on chest computed tomography of CTD-ILD. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed in Medline and Embase to identify eligible studies. Meta-analyses were completed using a random effects model to determine the pooled prevalence of CTD-ILD and ILD patterns. RESULTS: 11 582 unique citations were identified with 237 articles included. Pooled prevalence of ILD was 11% in rheumatoid arthritis (95% CI 7-15%), 47% in systemic sclerosis (44-50%), 41% in idiopathic inflammatory myositis (33-50%), 17% in primary Sjögren's syndrome (12-21%), 56% in mixed connective tissue disease (39-72%) and 6% in systemic lupus erythematosus (3-10%). Usual interstitial pneumonia was the most prevalent ILD pattern in rheumatoid arthritis (pooled prevalence of 46%), while nonspecific interstitial pneumonia was the most common ILD pattern in all other CTD subtypes (pooled prevalence range 27-76%). Across all CTDs with available data, positive serology and higher inflammatory markers were risk factors for development of ILD. DISCUSSION: We identified substantial variability in ILD across CTD subtypes suggesting that CTD-ILD is too heterogenous to be considered a single entity.
