Policies in Canada fail to address disparities in access to person-centred osteoarthritis care: a content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women are disproportionately impacted by osteoarthritis (OA) but less likely than men to access OA care, particularly racialized women. One way to reduce inequities is through policies that can influence healthcare services. We examined how OA-relevant policies in Canada address equitable, person-centred OA care for women. METHODS: We used content analysis to extract data from English-language OA-relevant documents referred to as policies or other synonymous terms published in 2000 or later identified by searching governmental and other web sites. We used summary statistics to describe policy characteristics, person-centred care using McCormack's six-domain framework, and mention of OA prevalence, barriers and strategies to improve equitable access to OA care among women. RESULTS: We included 14 policies developed from 2004 to 2021. None comprehensively addressed all person-centred care domains, and few addressed individual domains: enable self-management (50%), share decisions (43%), exchange information (29%), respond to emotions (14%), foster a healing relationship (0%) and manage uncertainty (0%). Even when mentioned, content offered little guidance for how to achieve person-centred OA care. Few policies acknowledged greater prevalence of OA among women (36%), older (29%) or Indigenous persons (29%) and those of lower socioeconomic status (14%); or barriers to OA care among those of lower socioeconomic status (50%), in rural areas (43%), of older age (37%) or ethno-cultural groups (21%), or women (21%). Four (29%) policies recommended strategies for improving access to OA care at the patient (self-management education material in different languages and tailored to cultural norms), clinician (healthcare professional education) and system level (evaluate OA service equity, engage lay health leaders in delivering self-management programs, and offer self-management programs in a variety of formats). Five (36%) policies recommended research on how to improve OA care for equity-seeking groups. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian OA-relevant policies lack guidance to overcome disparities in access to person-centred OA care for equity-seeking groups including women. This study identified several ways to strengthen policies. Ongoing research must identify the needs and preferences of equity-seeking persons with OA, and evaluate the impact of various models of service delivery, knowledge needed to influence OA-relevant policy.

Priority strategies to reduce socio-gendered inequities in access to person-centred osteoarthritis care: Delphi survey.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis (OA) prevalence, severity and related comorbid conditions are greater among women compared with men, but women, particularly racialised women, are less likely than men to access OA care. We aimed to prioritise strategies needed to reduce inequities in OA management. DESIGN: Delphi survey of 28 strategies derived from primary research retained if at least 80% of respondents rated 6 or 7 on a 7-point Likert scale. SETTING: Online. PARTICIPANTS: 35 women of diverse ethno-cultural groups and 29 healthcare professionals of various specialties from across Canada. RESULTS: Of the 28 initial and 3 newly suggested strategies, 27 achieved consensus to retain: 20 in round 1 and 7 in round 2. Respondents retained 7 patient-level, 7 clinician-level and 13 system-level strategies. Women and professionals agreed on all but one patient-level strategy (eg, consider patients' cultural needs and economic circumstances) and all clinician-level strategies (eg, inquire about OA management needs and preferences). Some discrepancies emerged for system-level strategies that were more highly rated by women (eg, implement OA-specific clinics). Comments revealed general support among professionals for system-level strategies provided that additional funding or expanded scope of practice was targeted to only formally trained professionals and did not reduce funding for professionals who already managed OA. CONCLUSIONS: We identified multilevel strategies that could be implemented by healthcare professionals, organisations or systems to mitigate inequities and improve OA care for diverse women.

Multi-level strategies to improve equitable timely person-centred osteoarthritis care for diverse women: qualitative interviews with women and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Women are more likely to develop osteoarthritis (OA), and have greater OA pain and disability compared with men, but are less likely to receive guideline-recommended management, particularly racialized women. OA care of diverse women, and strategies to improve the quality of their OA care is understudied. The purpose of this study was to explore strategies to overcome barriers of access to OA care for diverse women. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with key informants and used content analysis to identify themes regarding what constitutes person-centred OA care, barriers of OA care, and strategies to support equitable timely access to person-centred OA care. RESULTS: We interviewed 27 women who varied by ethno-cultural group (e.g. African or Caribbean Black, Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Pakistani, Caucasian), age, region of Canada, level of education, location of OA and years with OA; and 31 healthcare professionals who varied by profession (e.g. family physician, nurse practitioner, community pharmacist, physio- and occupational therapists, chiropractors, healthcare executives, policy-makers), career stage, region of Canada and type of organization. Participants within and across groups largely agreed on approaches for person-centred OA care across six domains: foster a healing relationship, exchange information, address emotions, manage uncertainty, share decisions and enable self-management. Participants identified 22 barriers of access and 18 strategies to overcome barriers at the patient- (e.g. educational sessions and materials that accommodate cultural norms offered in different languages and formats for persons affected by OA), healthcare professional- (e.g. medical and continuing education on OA and on providing OA care tailored to intersectional factors) and system- (e.g. public health campaigns to raise awareness of OA, and how to prevent and manage it; self-referral to and public funding for therapy, greater number and ethno-cultural diversity of healthcare professionals, healthcare policies that address the needs of diverse women, dedicated inter-professional OA clinics, and a national strategy to coordinate OA care) levels. CONCLUSIONS: This research contributes to a gap in knowledge of how to optimize OA care for disadvantaged groups including diverse women. Ongoing efforts are needed to examine how best to implement these strategies, which will require multi-sector collaboration and must engage diverse women.

Identifying strategies that support equitable person-centred osteoarthritis care for diverse women: content analysis of guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: Women are disproportionately impacted by osteoarthritis (OA) but less likely than men to access early diagnosis and management, or experience OA care tailored through person-centred approaches to their needs and preferences, particularly racialized women. One way to support clinicians in optimizing OA care is through clinical guidelines. We aimed to examine the content of OA guidelines for guidance on providing equitable, person-centred care to disadvantaged groups including women. METHODS: We searched indexed databases and websites for English-language OA-relevant guidelines published in 2000 or later by non-profit organizations. We used manifest content analysis to extract data, and summary statistics and text to describe guideline characteristics, person-centred care (PCC) using a six-domain PCC framework, OA prevalence or barriers by intersectional factors, and strategies to improve equitable access to OA care. RESULTS: We included 36 OA guidelines published from 2003 to 2021 in 8 regions or countries. Few (39%) development panels included patients. While most (81%) guidelines included at least one PCC domain, guidance was often brief or vague, few addressed exchange information, respond to emotions and manage uncertainty, and none referred to fostering a healing relationship. Few (39%) guidelines acknowledged or described greater prevalence of OA among particular groups; only 3 (8%) noted that socioeconomic status was a barrier to OA care, and only 2 (6%) offered guidance to clinicians on how to improve equitable access to OA care: assess acceptability, availability, accessibility, and affordability of self-management interventions; and employ risk assessment tools to identify patients without means to cope well at home after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that OA guidelines do not support clinicians in caring for diverse persons with OA who face disadvantages due to intersectional factors that influence access to and quality of care. Developers could strengthen OA guidelines by incorporating guidance for PCC and for equity that could be drawn from existing frameworks and tools, and by including diverse persons with OA on guideline development panels. Future research is needed to identify multi-level (patient, clinician, system) strategies that could be implemented via guidelines or in other ways to improve equitable, person-centred OA care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was informed by a team of researchers, collaborators, and thirteen diverse women with lived experience, who contributed to planning, and data collection, analysis and interpretation by reviewing study materials and providing verbal (during meetings) and written (via email) feedback.

Strategies to Improve Equitable Access to Early Osteoarthritis Diagnosis and Management: An updated Review.

Though osteoarthritis (OA) affects millions of people worldwide, many fail to access recommended early, person-centered OA care, particularly women who are disproportionately impacted by OA. A prior review identified few strategies to improve equitable access to early diagnosis and management for multiple disadvantaged groups. We aimed to update that review with literature published in 2010 or later on strategies to improve OA care for disadvantaged groups including women. We identified only 11 eligible studies, of which only 2 (18%) focused on women only. Other disadvantaged groups targeted in the largely US-based studies included patients who are Black, Spanish-speaking, rural, and adults aged 60 years and older. All studies evaluated interventions targeted to patients; 4 (36%) assessed video decision aids, and 7 (63.6%) assessed in-person, video, or telephone self-management education. Interventions were often multifaceted (n = 9, 82%), and most studies (n = 8, 73%) achieved positive outcomes in at least some outcomes measured. No studies evaluated clinician- or system-level strategies. Few studies (n = 5, 45%) described how they tailored strategies to disadvantaged groups or how they addressed person-centered care concepts apart from enabling self-management. Future research is needed to develop, implement, evaluate, and scale-up multilevel strategies to enhance equitable, person-centered OA care for disadvantaged groups including women.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with rheumatoid arthritis: data from the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI).

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created challenges for patients with RA. We examined the potential impact of the pandemic on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), disease activity and medication profiles, comparing the periods pre-pandemic and during the pandemic. Methods: Patients enrolled in the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative were included if they had at least one visit to a physician or study interviewer within 12 months before and after the start of pandemic-related closures in Ontario (15 March 2020). Baseline characteristics, disease activity, PROs [i.e. health assessment questionnaire disability index, RA disease activity index (RADAI), European quality of life five-dimension questionnaire], medication use and changes were included. Student's paired two-sample t-tests and McNamar's tests were performed for continuous and categorical variables between time periods. Results: The sample for analysis consisted of 1508 patients, with a mean (s.d.) age of 62.7 (12.5) years, and 79% were female. Despite decreases in the number of in-person visits during the pandemic, there was no significant negative impact on disease activity or PRO scores. The DASs in both periods remained low, with either no clinically significant differences or slight improvement. Scores for mental, social and physical health were either stable or improved. There were statistically significant decreases in conventional synthetic DMARD use (P < 0.0001) and increased Janus kinase inhibitor usage (P = 0.0002). Biologic DMARD use remained stable throughout the pandemic. Conclusion: In this cohort, disease activity and PROs of RA patients remained stable during the COVID-19 pandemic. The longer-term outcomes of the pandemic warrant investigation.

Medical cannabis use by rheumatology patients in routine clinical care: results from The Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: Medical cannabis is often used to alleviate common symptoms in patients with chronic conditions. With cannabis legalisation in Canada and easier access, it is important that rheumatologists understand its potential impact on their practice. Among patients attending rheumatology clinics in Ontario we assessed: the prevalence of medical cannabis use; symptoms treated; rheumatologists' perceptions. METHODS: Eight rheumatology clinics recruited consecutive adult patients in a 3-part medical cannabis survey: the first completed by rheumatologists; the second by all patients; the third by medical cannabis users. Student's t-test and Chi-square test were used to compare medical cannabis users to never users. RESULTS: 799 patients participated, 163 (20.4%) currently using medical cannabis or within <2 years and 636 never users; most had rheumatoid arthritis (37.8%) or osteoarthritis (34.0%). Compared to never users, current/past-users were younger; more likely to be taking opioids/anti-depressants, have psychiatric/gastrointestinal disorders, and have used recreational cannabis (p<0.05); had higher physician (2.9 vs. 2.1) and patient (6.0 vs. 4.2) global scores, and pain (6.2 vs. 4.7) (p<0.0001). Pain (95.5%), sleeping (82.3%) and anxiety (58.9%) were the most commonly treated symptoms; 78.2% of current/past-users reported medical cannabis was at least somewhat effective. Most rheumatologists reported being uncomfortable to authorise medical cannabis, primarily due to lack of evidence, knowledge, and product standardisation. CONCLUSIONS: Medical cannabis use among rheumatology patients in Ontario was two-fold higher than that reported for the general population of similar age. Use was associated with more severe disease, pain, and prior recreational use. Reported lack of research, knowledge, and product standardisation were barriers for rheumatologist use authorisation.

Best Practices for Virtual Care: A Consensus Statement From the Canadian Rheumatology Association.

OBJECTIVE: To develop best practice statements for the provision of virtual care in adult and pediatric rheumatology for the Canadian Rheumatology Association's (CRA) Telehealth Working Group (TWG). METHODS: Four members of the TWG representing adult, pediatric, university-based, and community rheumatology practices defined the scope of the project. A rapid literature review of existing systematic reviews, policy documents, and published literature and abstracts on the topic was conducted between April and May 2021. The review informed a candidate set of 7 statements and a supporting document. The statements were submitted to a 3-round (R) modified Delphi process with 22 panelists recruited through the CRA and patient advocacy organizations. Panelists rated the importance and feasibility of the statements on a Likert scale of 1-9. Statements with final median ratings between 7-9 with no disagreement were retained in the final set. RESULTS: Twenty-one (95%) panelists participated in R1, 15 (71%) in R2, and 18 (82%) in R3. All but 1 statement met inclusion criteria during R1. Revisions were made to 5/7 statements following R2 and an additional statement was added. All statements met inclusion criteria following R3. The statements addressed the following themes in the provision of virtual care: adherence to existing standards and regulations, appropriateness, consent, physical examination, patient-reported outcomes, use in addition to in-person visits, and complex comanagement of disease. CONCLUSION: The best practice statements represent a starting point for advancing virtual care in rheumatology. Future educational efforts to help implement these best practices and research to address identified knowledge gaps are planned.

An Advanced Clinician Practitioner in Arthritis Care (ACPAC) Maintains a Positive Patient Experience While Increasing Capacity in Rheumatology Community Care.

PURPOSE: This study describes patient care experiences of solo-rheumatologist and co-managed care models utilizing an Advanced Clinician Practitioner in Arthritis Care-trained Extended Role Practitioner (ACPAC-ERP) in three community rheumatology practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) were assigned to care provided by one of three (2 senior, 1 early-career) community-based rheumatologists (usual care), or an ACPAC-ERP (co-managed care) for the 6-months following diagnosis. Patient experiences were surveyed using validated measures of patient satisfaction (Patient Doctor Interaction Scale-PDIS), global ratings of confidence and satisfaction, referral patterns, disease activity (RADAI) and self-perceived disability (HAQ-Disability) as well as demographic information. Practice capacity was evaluated 18-months prior to, and across, the study period. RESULTS: Of 55 participants (mean age 56.6 years, 61.8% female), 33 received co-managed care. Most participants were diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (65.5%) with a median symptom duration of 1.1 years. At 6-months, patients from both models of care were equally satisfied in terms of the information provided (usual care 4.6 vs co-managed care 4.7/5=greater satisfaction), rapport with health-care provider (4.6 vs 4.6/5) and having needs met (4.7 vs 4.5/5). Overall satisfaction was high (87.2 vs 85.3/100=completely satisfied) as was confidence in the system by which care was received (85.0 vs 82.1/100=completely confident). Usual care patients reported higher perceived disability than co-managed patients (HAQ-Disability 0.5 vs 0.2/3=unable to do). Significant differences in overall RADAI score (p=0.014) were found between the two models. The senior rheumatologist, with a previously saturated practice, attained a 37% capacity increase for new patients utilizing the co-managed care model. CONCLUSION: The ACPAC-ERP model was equivalent to the solo-rheumatologist model with regard to patient experience and satisfaction. A co-management model utilizing a highly trained ACPAC-ERP can increase capacity in community rheumatology clinics for patients newly diagnosed with IA while maintaining confidence and satisfaction with their care.

Evaluation of Rheumatology Workforce Supply Changes in Ontario, Canada, from 2000 to 2030.

Rheumatology workforces are increasingly challenged by too few physicians in face of the growing burden of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Rheumatology is one of the most frequent non-surgical specialty referrals and has the longest wait times for subspecialists. We used a population-based approach to describe changes in the rheumatology workforce, patient volumes and geographic variation in the supply of and access to rheumatologists, in Ontario, Canada, between 2000 and 2019, and projected changes in supply by 2030. Over time, we observed greater feminization of the workforce and increasing age of workforce members. We identified a large regional variation in rheumatology supply. Fewer new patients are seen annually, which likely contributes to increasing wait times and reduced access to care. Strategies and policies to raise the critical mass and improve regional distribution of supply to effectively provide rheumatology care and support the healthcare delivery of patients with RMDs are needed.

A Population-Based Approach to Reporting System-Level Performance Measures for Rheumatoid Arthritis Care.

OBJECTIVE: To operationalize and report on nationally endorsed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) performance measures (PMs) using health administrative data for British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: All patients with RA in BC ages ≥18 years were identified between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2009 using health administrative data and followed until December 2014. PMs tested include: the percentage of incident patients with ≥1 rheumatologist visit within 365 days; the percentage of prevalent patients with ≥1 rheumatologist visit per year; the percentage of prevalent patients dispensed disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy; and time from RA diagnosis to DMARD therapy. Measures were reported on patients seen by rheumatologists, and in the total population. RESULTS: The cohort included 38,673 incident and 57,922 prevalent RA cases. The percentage of patients seen by a rheumatologist within 365 days increased over time (35% in 2000 to 65% in 2009), while the percentage of RA patients under the care of a rheumatologist seen yearly declined (79% in 2001 to 39% in 2014). The decline was due to decreasing visit rates with increasing follow-up time rather than calendar effect. The percentage of RA patients dispensed a DMARD was suboptimal over follow-up (37% in 2014) in the total population but higher (87%) in those under current rheumatologist care. The median time to DMARD in those seen by a rheumatologist improved from 49 days in 2000 to 23 days in 2009, with 34% receiving treatment within the 14-day benchmark. CONCLUSION: This study describes the operationalization and reporting of national PMs using administrative data and identifies gaps in care to further examine and address.

Feminization of the Rheumatology Workforce: A Longitudinal Evaluation of Patient Volumes, Practice Sizes, and Physician Remuneration.

OBJECTIVE: To compare differences in clinical activity and remuneration between male and female rheumatologists and to evaluate associations between physician gender and practice sizes and patient volume, accounting for rheumatologists' age, and calendar year effects. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study in Ontario, Canada, between 2000 to 2015 identifying all rheumatologists practicing as full-time equivalents (FTEs) or above and assessed differences in practice sizes (number of unique patients), practice volumes (number of patient visits), and remuneration (total fee-for-service billings) between male and female rheumatologists. Multivariable linear regression was used to evaluate the effects of gender on practice size and volume separately, accounting for age and year. RESULTS: The number of rheumatologists practicing at ≥ 1 FTE increased from 89 to 120 from 2000 to 2015, with the percentage of females increasing from 27.0% to 41.7%. Males had larger practice sizes and practice volumes. Remuneration was consistently higher for males (median difference of CAD $46,000-102,000 annually). Our adjusted analyses estimated that in a given year, males saw a mean of 606 (95% CI 107-1105) more patients than females did, and had 1059 (95% CI 345-1773) more patient visits. Among males and females combined, there was a small but statistically significant reduction in mean annual number of patient visits, and middle-aged rheumatologists had greater practice sizes and volumes than their younger/older counterparts. CONCLUSION: On average, female rheumatologists saw fewer patients and had fewer patient visits annually relative to males, resulting in lower earnings. Increasing feminization necessitates workforce planning to ensure that populations' needs are met.

Patient, Rheumatologist and Therapist Perspectives on the Implementation of an Allied Health Rheumatology Triage (AHRT) Initiative in Ontario Rheumatology Clinics.

PURPOSE: The objective of this qualitative study was to explore patient, rheumatologist, and extended role practitioner (ERP) perspectives on the integration of an allied health rheumatology triage (AHRT) intervention in Ontario rheumatology clinics. Triage is the process of identifying the urgency of a patient's condition to ensure they receive specialist care within an appropriate length of time. This research explores the clinical/logistical impact of triage by occupational and physical therapists with advanced arthritis training (ERPs), including facilitators and barriers of success, and recommendations for future application. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were held with participating rheumatologists, ERPs, and a sample of patients from each clinical site (4 community, 3 hospital) in five Ontario cities. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed using basic qualitative description. Two independent researchers compared coding and achieved consensus. RESULTS: Patients (n=10), rheumatologists (n=6), and ERPs (n=5) participated in the study and reported reduced wait-times to rheumatology care, diagnosis, and treatment for those with inflammatory arthritis (IA). Rheumatologists and ERPs perceived that the intervention improved clinical efficiency and quality of care. Patients reported high satisfaction with ERP assessments, valuing early joint examination/laboratory tests, urgent referral if needed, and the provision of information, support, and management strategies. Facilitators of success included: supportive clinical staff, regular communication and collaboration between rheumatologist and ERP, and sufficient clinical space. Recommendations included extending ERP roles to include stable patient follow-up, and ERP care between scheduled rheumatology appointments. CONCLUSION: Findings support the integration of ERPs in a triage role in the community and hospital-based rheumatology models of care. Future research is needed to explore the impact of utilizing ERPs for stable patient follow-up in rheumatology settings.

Encounters with Rheumatologists in a Publicly Funded Canadian Healthcare System: A Population-based Study.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify population-level and practice-level encounters with rheumatologists over time. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study from 2000 to 2015 in Ontario, Canada, where all residents are covered by a single-payer healthcare system. Annual total number of unique patients seen by rheumatologists, the number of new patients seen, and total number of encounters with rheumatologists were identified. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2015, the percentage of the population seen by rheumatologists was constant over time (2.7%). During this time, Ontario had a stable supply of rheumatologists (0.8 full-time equivalents/75,000). From 2000 to 2015, the number of annual rheumatology encounters increased from 561,452 to 786,061, but the adjusted encounter rates remained stable over time (at 62 encounters per 1000 population). New patient assessment rates declined over time from 10 new outpatient assessments per 1000 in 2000 to 6 per 1000 in 2015. The crude volume of new patients seen annually decreased and an increasing proportion of rheumatology encounters were with established patients. We observed a shift in patient case mix over time, with more assessments for systemic inflammatory conditions. Rheumatologists' practice volumes, practice sizes, and the annual number of days providing clinical care decreased over time. CONCLUSION: Over a 15-year period, the annual percentage of the population seen by a rheumatologist remained constant and the volume of new patients decreased, while followup patient encounters increased. Patient encounters per rheumatologist decreased over time. Our findings provide novel information for rheumatology workforce planning. Factors affecting clinical activity warrant further research.

The Effect of Triage Assessments on Identifying Inflammatory Arthritis and Reducing Rheumatology Wait Times in Ontario.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the influence of triage assessments by extended role practitioners (ERP) on improving timeliness of rheumatology consultations for patients with suspected inflammatory arthritis (IA) or systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARD). METHODS: Rheumatologists reviewed primary care providers' referrals and identified patients with inadequate referral information, so that a decision about priority could not be made. Patients were assessed by an ERP to identify those with IA/SARD requiring an expedited rheumatologist consult. The time from referral to the first consultation was determined comparing patients who were expedited to those who were not, and to similar patients in a usual care control group identified through retrospective chart review. RESULTS: Seven rheumatologists from 5 communities participated in the study. Among 177 patients who received an ERP triage assessment, 75 patients were expedited and 102 were not. Expedited patients had a significantly shorter median (interquartile range) wait time to rheumatologist consult: 37.0 (24.5-55.5) days compared to non-expedited patients [105 (71.0-135.0) days] and controls [58.0 (24.0-104.0) days]. Accuracy comparing the ERP identification of IA/SARD to that of the rheumatologists was fair (κ 0.39, 95% CI 0.25-0.53). CONCLUSION: Patients triaged and expedited by ERP experienced shorter wait times compared to usual care; however, some patients with IA/SARD were missed and waited longer. Our findings suggest that ERP working in a triage role can improve access to care for those patients correctly identified with IA/SARD. Further research needs to identify an ongoing ERP educational process to ensure the success of the model.

Association of Patient, Prescriber, and Region With the Initiation of First Prescription of Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug Among Older Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Identical Health Insurance Coverage.

Importance: Prescribing the first biologic treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an important decision for patients, their physicians, and payers, with considerable costs and clinical implications. Conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) have known effectiveness and safety profiles and are less expensive; therefore, determining the variables contributing to csDMARD treatment duration is an essential question for patients, physicians, and payers. Objectives: To describe access to the first biologic DMARD prescription in a population of patients with RA and identical comprehensive health insurance coverage in Ontario, Canada, and to explore the associations of patient, prescriber, and geographic region with differences in time to first biologic prescription. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of incident patients with RA used administrative data with surveillance and patient-level data collected at yearly intervals. A total of 17 672 patients were included in the study; they were residents of Ontario, Canada, had an incident RA diagnosis at age 67 or older between 2002 and 2015, and received at least 1 csDMARD. Data were analyzed in November 2017. Exposure: Patient variables were age, sex, disease duration, socioeconomic status, distance to care, and supply of care in the patient's area of residence. Prescriber covariates were year of graduation, specialty of practice, and supply of rheumatologic care in the patient's geographic region. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time from first csDMARD prescription to receipt of first biologic medication. Results: Of 17 672 patients, 11 598 (65.6%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 75.2 (5.8) years. Characteristics associated with longer time to receipt of a biologic prescription were older age (HR for every 5-year increase, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.62-0.71; P < .001), male sex (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.89; P < .001), and distance to the nearest rheumatologist (HR per 10-km increase, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99; P < .001). Prescribers were primarily rheumatologists (151 of 214 [70.6%]) and primary care physicians (26 of 214 [12.1%]). After adjusting for the number of patients eligible to receive biologic DMARDs, rheumatologists' preferences (ie, yearly prescription rates) for using biologic DMARDs increased over time, from 1.7% in 2001 to 4.9% in 2015. After adjusting for calendar year and patient-, prescriber-, and region-level characteristics, substantial variation between prescribers in rates of prescribing a first biologic DMARD were found (65% variance). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found variation in time to receipt of first biologic DMARD after prescription of first csDMARD in a population with RA after adjustment for individual-level patient, prescriber, and geographic area covariates, despite identical universal health insurance coverage.

Quality and continuity of information between primary care physicians and rheumatologists.

BACKGROUND: Good communication is central to a high-quality consultation process. We assessed the quality of referral information from primary care physicians (PCPs) to rheumatologists and the quality and timeliness of consultation letters from rheumatologists back to PCPs. METHODS: We sampled referral letters between 2000 and 2013 from 168 PCPs and performed a retrospective chart review of 2430 patients referred to 146 rheumatologists. We assessed the completeness and timeliness of referral and consultation letters. RESULTS: Osteoarthritis (n = 787, 32%) and systemic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (n = 745, 31%) comprised the top reasons for referral. Only 55% of referral letters summarized the patients' medical history. Referral letters provided some details of diagnostic tests (51% labs, 34% imaging) but there was underreporting of this information on referral letters. Almost all referral letters (92%) contained details of at least one patient symptom, with the most common complaint being joint pain (54%). Only half of all referral letters provided symptom duration. The PCP only stressed an urgent consultation among 211 patients (9%). Overall, 69% of consultation letters were returned to PCPs within 30 days of consultation visit. CONCLUSION: We found that basic items necessary for appropriate triage, including a description of symptoms or other relevant history and results of investigations were often lacking in referral letters. The delay of receipt of consultation letters may further represent a lost opportunity for coordination and continuity of care, and may affect the quality of care patients receive.

An advanced clinician practitioner in arthritis care can improve access to rheumatology care in community-based practice.

OBJECTIVE: To facilitate access and improve wait times to a rheumatologist's consultation, this study aimed to 1) determine the ability of an advanced clinician practitioner in arthritis care (ACPAC)-trained extended role practitioner (ERP) to triage patients with suspected inflammatory arthritis (IA) for priority assessment by a rheumatologist and 2) determine the impact of an ERP on access-to-care as measured by time-to-rheumatologist-assessment and time-to-treatment-decision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A community-based ACPAC-trained ERP triaged new referrals for suspected IA. Patients with suspected IA were booked to see the rheumatologist on a priority basis. Diagnostic accuracy of the ERP to correctly identify priority patients; the level of agreement between ERP and rheumatologist (Kappa coefficient and percent agreement); and the time-to-treatment-decision for confirmed cases of IA were investigated. Retrospective chart review then compared time-to-rheumatologist-assessment and time-to-treatment-decision in the solo-rheumatologist versus the ERP-triage model. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one patients were triaged. The ERP designated 54 patients for priority assessment. The rheumatologist confirmed IA in 49/54 (90.7% positive predictive value [PPV]). Of the 121 patients, 67 patients were designated as nonpriority by the ERP, and none were determined to have IA by the rheumatologist (100% negative predictive value [NPV]). Excellent agreement was found between the ERP and the rheumatologist (Kappa coefficient 0.92, 95% CI: 0.84-0.99). In the ERP-triage model, time-from-referral-to-treatment-decision for patients with IA was 73.7 days (SD 40.4, range 12-183) compared with 124.6 days (SD 61.7, range 26-359) in the solo-rheumatologist model (40% reduction in time-to-treatment-decision). CONCLUSION: A well-trained and experienced ERP can shorten the time-to-Rheumatologist-assessment and time-to-treatment-decision for patients with suspected IA.

Planning for the Rheumatologist Workforce: Factors Associated With Work Hours and Volumes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors associated with rheumatologists' clinical work hours and patient volumes based on a national workforce survey in rheumatology. METHODS: Adult rheumatologists who participated in a 2015 workforce survey were included (n = 255). Univariate analysis evaluated the relationship between demographics (sex, age, academic vs. community practice, billing fee for service vs. other plan, years in practice, retirement plans) and workload (total hours and number of ½-day clinics per week) or patient volumes (number of new and follow-up consults per week). Multiple linear regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between practice type, sex, age, and working hours or clinical volumes. RESULTS: Male rheumatologists had more ½-day clinics (p = 0.05) and saw more new patients per week (p = 0.001) compared with females. Community rheumatologists had more ½-day clinics and new and follow-up visits per week (all p < 0.01). Fee-for-service rheumatologists reported more ½-day clinics per week (p < 0.001) and follow-ups (p = 0.04). Workload did not vary by age, years in practice, or retirement plans. In multivariate analysis, community practice remained independently associated with higher patient volumes and more clinics per week. Female rheumatologists reported fewer clinics and fewer follow-up patients per week than males, but this did not affect the duration of working hours or new consultations. Age was not associated with work volumes or hours. CONCLUSIONS: Practice type and rheumatologist sex should be considered when evaluating rheumatologist workforce needs, as the proportion of female rheumatologists has increased over time and alternative billing practices have been introduced in many centers.

Real-World Tocilizumab Use in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Canada: 12-Month Results From an Observational, Noninterventional Study.

INTRODUCTION: This study was conducted to observe patterns of use of the interleukin-6 receptor-alpha inhibitor tocilizumab in routine clinical practice in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: This was a 12-month noninterventional, observational study in adult patients with RA who initiated tocilizumab in routine practice in Canada according to the local product monograph. The primary end point was the proportion of patients receiving tocilizumab at 6 months. Secondary end points were treatment patterns, effectiveness, and safety of tocilizumab over 12 months. RESULTS: Of 200 patients who initiated tocilizumab (91.0% at 8 mg/kg), 67 (33.5%) received tocilizumab monotherapy and 133 (66.5%) received tocilizumab combined with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated that 85% (95% CI 74-92%) of monotherapy and 89% (95% CI 82-93%) of combination therapy patients continued to receive tocilizumab at 6 months (log-rank p = 0.0888). During the observation period, 12 (17.9%) monotherapy and 27 (20.3%) combination therapy patients withdrew from the study. At month 12, 58.5% in the monotherapy group and 59.3% in the combination therapy group achieved Disease Activity Score at 28 joints remission (≤ 2.6), 25.6% and 24.7% achieved Simplified Disease Activity Index remission (≤ 3.3), and 18.2% and 22.3% achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (≤ 2.8), respectively. Rates of serious adverse events and serious infections were found in 29.6/100 patient-years (PY) and 3.1/100 PY, respectively, for monotherapy and 19.2/100 PY and 4.8/100 PY, respectively, for combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients initiating tocilizumab in routine practice had comparable effectiveness and safety outcomes regardless of whether they received tocilizumab as monotherapy or as combination therapy with csDMARDs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01613378 FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche (Roche) Canada.