Digital Outcome Measurement to Improve Care for Patients With Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: Protocol for the IMID Registry.

BACKGROUND: Despite enormous clinical improvements, due to better management strategies and the availability of biologicals, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) still have a significant impact on patients' lives. To further reduce disease burden, provider- as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROs) should be taken into account during treatment and follow-up. Web-based collection of these outcomes generates valuable repeated measurements, which could be used (1) in daily clinical practice for patient-centered care, including shared decision-making; (2) for research purposes; and (3) as an essential step toward the implementation of value-based health care (VBHC). Our ultimate goal is that our health care delivery system is completely aligned with the principles of VBHC. For aforementioned reasons, we implemented the IMID registry. OBJECTIVE: The IMID registry is a digital system for routine outcome measurement that mainly includes PROs to improve care for patients with IMIDs. METHODS: The IMID registry is a longitudinal observational prospective cohort study within the departments of rheumatology, gastroenterology, dermatology, immunology, clinical pharmacy, and outpatient pharmacy of the Erasmus MC, the Netherlands. Patients with the following diseases are eligible for inclusion: inflammatory arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, uveitis, Behçet disease, sarcoidosis, and systemic vasculitis. Generic and disease-specific (patient-reported) outcomes, including adherence to medication, side effects, quality of life, work productivity, disease damage, and activity, are collected from patients and providers at fixed intervals before and during outpatient clinic visits. Data are collected and visualized through a data capture system, which is linked directly to the patients' electronic health record, which not only facilitates a more holistic care approach, but also helps with shared decision-making. RESULTS: The IMID registry is an ongoing cohort with no end date. Inclusion started in April 2018. From start until September 2022, a total of 1417 patients have been included from the participating departments. The mean age at inclusion was 46 (SD 16) years, and 56% of the patient population is female. The average percentage of filled out questionnaires at baseline is 84%, which drops to 72% after 1 year of follow-up. This decline may be due to the fact that the outcomes are not always discussed during the outpatient clinic visit or because the questionnaires were sometimes forgotten to set out. The registry is also used for research purposes and 92% of the patients with IMIDs gave informed consent to use their data for that. CONCLUSIONS: The IMID registry is a web-based digital system that collects provider- and PROs. The collected outcomes are used to improve care for the individual patient with an IMID and facilitate shared decision-making, and they are also used for research purposes. The measurement of these outcomes is an essential step toward the implementation of VBHC. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/43230.

Impact of the First SARS-CoV-2 Lockdown on Adherence to Biological Treatment in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases in the Netherlands.

Purpose: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, national and international societies have recommended continuing biological agents in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. However, adherence to biological treatment might decrease, because these recommendations contradict patients' beliefs. Especially an increased concern about side effects could have influenced the adherence to biological treatment during the first lockdown. The primary objective was to investigate the impact of the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown on adherence to biological treatment in IMID patients. Patients and Methods: In this prospective cohort study, IMID patients who received a biological agent before and during the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown (March 2020- June 2020) were included. Patients were excluded if they did not complete the medication adherence report scale-5 (MARS-5) questionnaire at ≥1 visit before the lockdown and ≥1 visit during the lockdown. Adherence to biological treatment was measured with the MARS-5 and Medication Possession Ratio (MPR). Results: We included 157 IMID patients. The percentage of adherent patients, defined as MARS-5 score >21, was significantly lower during the lockdown compared to the period before the lockdown (88.5% vs 84.1%, p<0.001). Additionally, the overall percentage of adherent patients during the lockdown based on the MPR ≥90% was significantly lower compared to adherence based upon the MARS-5 (65.1% vs 84.1%, p<0.001). Conclusion: This study showed that the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown negatively impacts adherence to biological treatment in IMID patients. Therefore, treating physicians should be aware of this problem to minimize the potential harmful effects of non-adherence.

A Practical Guide for Assessment of Skin Burden in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatologists play a pivotal role in the management of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Due to time constraints during clinic visits, the skin may not receive the attention needed for optimal patient outcome. Therefore, the aim of this study was to select a set of core questions that can help rheumatologists in daily rheumatology clinical practice to identify patients with PsA with a high skin burden. METHODS: Baseline data from patients included in the Dutch South West Psoriatic Arthritis (DEPAR) cohort were used. Questions were derived from the Skindex-17 and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) questionnaires. Underlying clusters of questions were identified with an exploratory principal component analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation, after which a 2-parameter logistic model was fitted per cluster. Questions were selected based on their discrimination and difficulty. Subsequently, 2 flowcharts were made with categories of skin burden severity. Clinical considerations were specified per category. RESULTS: In total, 413 patients were included. The PCA showed 2 underlying clusters: a psychosocial domain and a domain assessing physical symptoms. We selected these 2 domains. The psychosocial domain contains 3 questions and specifies 4 categories of skin burden severity. The physical symptoms domain contains 2 questions and categorizes patients in 1 out of 3 categories. CONCLUSION: We have selected a set with a maximum of 5 questions that rheumatologists can easily implement in their consultation to assess skin burden in patients with PsA. This practical guide makes the assessment of skin burden more accessible to rheumatologists and can aid in clinical decision making.

Impact of the Coronavirus Disease Pandemic on Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: To learn from the crisis caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and be prepared for future pandemics, it is important to investigate the impact of this period on the wellbeing of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). AIMS: To describe the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and disease control of IBD patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in The Netherlands. METHODS: Between March 17 and July 1, 2020, patients aged 18 years and older with IBD from the Erasmus MC (Rotterdam, The Netherlands) were invited to complete online questionnaires at week 0, 2, 6 and 12. The Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Control-8 (IBD-control-8) and the numeric rating scale on fatigue were used. The evolution of the different outcomes over time was measured using mixed models. RESULTS: Of 1151 invited patients, 851 patients (67% CD and 33% UC or IBD-U) participated in the study (response rate 74%). No relevant changes in total scores were found over time for the IBDQ (effect estimate 0.006, 95% CI [- 0.003 to 0.015]) and IBD-control-8 (effect estimate 0.004, 95% CI [0.998-1.011]). There was a slight, increasing trend in fatigue scores over time (effect estimate 0.011, 95% CI [0.004, 0.019]). CONCLUSIONS: This first lock down due to the COVID-19 pandemic in The Netherlands did not impact on the HRQoL and disease control of patients with IBD. Up to date information may have contributed to a stable HRQoL in IBD patients even in an extreme period with restrictions and insecurities.

Behavioural, psychiatric and psychosocial factors associated with aggressive behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review and narrative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Aggressive behaviour is prevalent in people with intellectual disabilities. To understand the aetiology, it is important to recognize factors associated with the behaviour. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted and included studies published between January 2002 and April 2017 on the association of behavioural, psychiatric and psychosocial factors with aggressive behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were included that presented associations with 11 behavioural, psychiatric and psychosocial factors. Conflicting evidence was found on the association of these factors with aggressive behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: The aetiology of aggressive behaviour is specific for a certain person in a certain context and may be multifactorial. Additional research is required to identify contributing factors, to understand causal relationships and to increase knowledge on possible interaction effects of different factors.

The Development and Evaluation of Personalized Training in Shared Decision-making Skills for Rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVE: Many factors influence a patient's preference in engaging in shared decision making (SDM). Several training programs have been developed for teaching SDM to physicians, but none of them focused on the patients' preferences. We developed an SDM training program for rheumatologists with a specific focus on patients' preferences and assessed its effects. METHODS: A training program was developed, pilot tested, and given to 30 rheumatologists. Immediately after the training and 10 weeks later, rheumatologists were asked to complete a questionnaire to evaluate the training. Patients were asked before and after the training to complete a questionnaire on patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Ten weeks after the training, 57% of the rheumatologists felt they were capable of estimating the need of patients to engage in SDM, 62% felt their communication skills had improved, and 33% reported they engaged more in SDM. Up to 268 patients were included. Overall, patient satisfaction was high, but there were no statistically significant differences in patient satisfaction before and after the training. CONCLUSION: The training was received well by the participating rheumatologists. Even in a population of rheumatologists that communicates well, 62% reported improvement. The training program increased awareness about the principles of SDM in patients and physicians, and improved physicians' communicative skills, but did not lead to further improvement in patients' satisfaction, which was already high.

Preferences of patients with rheumatoid arthritis regarding disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: Although patients have different treatment preferences, these individual preferences could often be grouped in subgroups with shared preferences. Knowledge of these subgroups as well as factors associated with subgroup membership supports health care professionals in the understanding of what matters to patients in clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVES: To identify subgroups of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) based on their shared preferences toward disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and to identify factors associated with subgroup membership. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment to determine DMARD preferences of adult patients with RA was designed based on a literature review, expert recommendations, and focus groups. In this multicenter study, patients were asked to state their preferred choice between two different hypothetical treatment options, described by seven DMARD characteristics with three levels within each characteristic. Latent class analyses and multinomial logistic regressions were used to identify subgroups and the characteristics (patient characteristics, disease-related variables, and beliefs about medicines) associated with subgroup membership. RESULTS: Among 325 participating patients with RA, three subgroups were identified: an administration-driven subgroup (45.6%), a benefit-driven subgroup (29.7%), and a balanced subgroup (24.7%). Patients who were currently using biologic DMARDs were significantly more likely to belong to the balanced subgroup than the administration-driven subgroup (relative risk ratio (RRR): 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28-0.89). Highly educated patients were significantly more likely to belong to the benefit-driven subgroup than the balanced subgroup (RRR: 11.4, 95% CI: 0.97-133.6). Patients' medication-related concerns did not contribute significantly to subgroup membership, whereas a near-significant association was found between patients' beliefs about medication necessity and their membership of the benefit-driven subgroup (RRR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.00-1.23). CONCLUSION: Three subgroups with shared preferences were identified. Only biologic DMARD use and educational level were associated with subgroup membership. Integrating patient's medication preferences in pharmacotherapy decisions may improve the quality of decisions and possibly medication adherence.

Does non-adherence to DMARDs influence hospital-related healthcare costs for early arthritis in the first year of treatment?

INTRODUCTION: Non-adherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is suspected to relate to health care costs. In this study we investigated this relation in the first year of treatment. METHODS: In a multi-center cohort study with a one year follow up, non-adherence was continuously measured using electronic monitored medication jars. Non-adherence was defined as the number of days with a negative difference between expected and observed opening of the container. Cost measurement focused on hospital costs in the first year: consultations, emergency room visits, hospitalization, medical procedures, imaging modalities, medication costs, and laboratory tests. Cost volumes were registered from patient medical files. We applied multivariate regression analyses for the association between non-adherence and costs, and other variables (age, sex, center, baseline disease activity, diagnosis, socioeconomic status, anxiety and depression) and costs. RESULTS: Of the 275 invited patients, 206 were willing to participate. 74.2% had rheumatoid arthritis, 20.9% had psoriatic arthritis and 4.9% undifferentiated arthritis. 23.7% of the patients were more than 20% non-adherent over the follow-up period. Mean costs are € 2117.25 (SD € 3020.32). Non-adherence was positively related to costs in addition to baseline anxiety. CONCLUSION: Non-adherence is associated with health care costs in the first year of treatment for arthritis. This suggests that improving adherence is not only associated with better outcome, but also with savings.

Focus group interviews reveal reasons for differences in the perception of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Doctors frequently see patients who have difficulties coping with their disease and rate their disease activity high, despite the fact that according to the doctors, the disease activity is low. This study explored the patients' perspectives on this discordance that may help to understand why for some patients, usual care seems to be insufficient. METHODS: In our qualitative study we conducted focus group interviews where questions were used as a guideline. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Twenty-nine patients participated in four focus groups. Participants could not put their finger exactly on why doctors estimated that their disease activity was low, while they experienced high levels of disease activity. During the in-depth focus interviews, seven themes emerged that appeared related to high experienced disease activity: (1) perceived stress, (2) balancing activities and rest, (3) medication intake, (4) social stress, (5) relationship with professionals, (6) comorbidity, and (7) physical fitness. CONCLUSION: When patients were asked why their view of their disease activity was different from that of their physician, seven themes emerged. The way participants coped with these themes seemed to be the predominant concept. Specific interventions that focus on one or more of the reported themes and on coping may improve not only the quality of life of these patients but also the satisfaction with the patient-doctor relationship for both parties.

Psychosocial predictors of DMARD adherence in the first three months of treatment for early arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To induce disease remission, early arthritis patients should adhere to their disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in the first months after diagnosis. It remains unknown why some patients are non-adherent. We aimed to identify patients at risk for non-adherence in the first 3 months of treatment. METHODS: Adult DMARD-naive early arthritis patients starting synthetic DMARDs filled out items on potential adherence predictors at baseline. Adherence was measured continuously. Non-adherence was defined as not opening the electronically monitored pill bottle when it should have been. Items were reduced and clustered using principal component analysis. The most discriminating items were identified with latent trait models. We used a multivariable logistic regression model to find non-adherence predictors. RESULTS: 301 patients agreed to participate. Adherence was high and declined over time. Principal component analysis led to 7 dimensions, while subsequent latent trait models analyses led to 15 dimensions. Two dimensions were associated with adherence, one dimension was associated with non-adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Information seeking behavior and positive expectations about the course of the disease are associated with adherence. Patients who become passive because of pain are at risk for non-adherence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Rheumatologists have cues to identify non-adherence, and may intervene on non-adherence through implementing shared decision making techniques.

Nonadherence to disease modifying antirheumatic drugs in the first year after diagnosis: comparing three adherence measures in early arthritis patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare three measurement methods for non-adherence to DMARDs in early arthritis patients: the Compliance Questionnaire Rheumatology (CQR), the intracellular uptake of MTX in the form of MTX-polyglutamates (MTX-PGs) and electronic measurement with Medication Event Monitoring Systems (MEMS). METHODS: DMARD naïve early arthritis patients were included in an ongoing cohort study. MEMS were used to measure adherence continuously, while every 3 months MTX-PGs were collected together with the CQR. The associations between the measures were estimated with Spearman rank correlations. Sensitivity and specificity of the CQR against a MEMS cut-off was compared at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The same applied to MTX-PGs against a MEMS cut-off and MTX-PGs against a CQR cut-off. For the association between MEMS, the CQR and MTX-PGs, a multilevel linear regression model was performed with age, gender, weeks of treatment and MTX dosage as covariates. RESULTS: We included 206 patients. Non-adherence measured with MEMS varied over time and between DMARDs. The CQR score was not associated with MEMS non-adherence at 3, 9 and 12 months. At 9 months, MTX-PGs was associated with MEMS non-adherence, as well as with the CQR. All correlations were below 0.30. CONCLUSION: Associations between the three measures are weak. Explanations are individual differences in the uptake of MTX, and little variance in adherence between patients. Moreover, the measurement domains differ: perceptions (CQR), behaviour (MEMS) and pharmacokinetics (MTX).

Non-adherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is associated with higher disease activity in early arthritis patients in the first year of the disease.

INTRODUCTION: Non-adherence to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) hampers the targets of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment, obtaining low disease activity and decreasing radiological progression. This study investigates if, and to what extent, non-adherence to treatment would lead to a higher 28-joint count disease activity score (DAS28) in the first year after diagnosis. METHODS: Adult patients from an ongoing cohort study on treatment adherence were selected if they fulfilled the EULAR/ACR2010 criteria for RA, and were to start with their first DMARDs. Clinical variables were assessed at baseline and every 3 months. Non-adherence was continuously electronically measured and was defined as the proportion of days with a negative difference between expected and observed openings of the medication container out of the 3-month period before DAS28 measurement. Generalized linear mixed models were used to investigate whether the DAS28 related to non-adherence. Covariates included were age, sex, baseline DAS28, rheumatoid factor positivity, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA) positivity, anxiety, depression, weeks of treatment, number of DMARDs used, education level, use of subcutaneous methotrexate and biological use. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty patients met the inclusion criteria for RA. During the study period 17 patients became lost to follow-up. There was a decline in adherence over time for all DMARDs except for prednisone. Non-adherence is a predictor of disease activity in the first 6 months of therapy, adjusted for weeks of treatment, baseline DAS28, and baseline anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Non-adherence relates to disease activity. Therefore, interventions towards enhancing adherence can improve disease outcome.

Facilitators and barriers to adherence in the initiation phase of Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD) use in patients with arthritis who recently started their first DMARD treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To explore themes associated with adherence in the initiation phase for first-time use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in patients with inflammatory arthritis using focus groups and individual interviews. METHODS: Thirty-three patients were interviewed in focus groups and individual interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and imported into ATLAS.ti software (Scientific Software Development GmbH). Responses that included reasons for adherence or nonadherence in the initiation phase were extracted and coded by 2 coders separately. The 2 coders conferred until consensus on the codes was achieved. Codes were classified into overarching themes. RESULTS: Five themes emerged: (1) symptom severity, (2) experiences with medication, (3) perceptions about medication and the illness, (4) information about medication, and (5) communication style and trust in the rheumatologist. CONCLUSION: Perceptions about medication and the communication style with, and trust in, the rheumatologist were mentioned the most in relation to starting DMARD. The rheumatologist plays a crucial role in influencing adherence behavior by addressing perceptions about medication, providing information, and establishing trust in the treatment plan.

How to study determinants related to medication adherence in newly diagnosed polyarthritis patients for the development of a prediction instrument.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with a chronic disease, the appropriate use of medication is the key to manage their illness. Adherence to medication is therefore important. Adherence can be divided into three parts: the initiation part, the execution phase, and the discontinuation part. Little is known about the determinants of the initiation part. For this reason, we describe the conduct of a stepwise procedure to study determinants of medication initiation for patients with a chronic disease. METHODS/DESIGN: The stepwise procedure comprises of eliciting a list of all potential determinants via literature review, interviewing patients, and consulting an expert panel. This is followed by embedding the determinants in a theoretical framework, developing a questionnaire, and choosing adherence measurement methods. The consecutive steps that we conducted for the development of a tool for the prediction of adherence in our study sample of early arthritis patients are described. DISCUSSION: Although we used a thorough procedure, there are still some pitfalls to take into account, such as the choice of theoretical framework. A strength of this study is that we use multiple adherence measurement methods and that we also take clinical outcomes into account.

Factors associated with adherence to pharmaceutical treatment for rheumatoid arthritis patients: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with adherence to medication for rheumatoid arthritis or undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis using a systematic literature search. METHODS: PubMed, PsycINFO, EMbase and CINAHL databases were systematically searched from inception to February 2011. Articles were included if they addressed medication adherence, used a reproducible definition, determinants and its statistical relationship. Methodological quality was assessed using a quality assessment list for observational studies derived from recommendations from Sanderson et al. (2007) [12]. Resulting factors were interpreted using the Health Belief Model (HBM). RESULTS: 18 out of 1479 identified studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 64 factors were identified and grouped according to the HBM into demographic and psychosocial characteristics, cues to action and perceived benefits versus perceived barriers. The belief that the medication is necessary and DMARD use prior to the use of anti-TNF had strong evidence for a positive association with adherence. There is limited evidence for positive associations between adherence and race other than White, general cognition, satisfactory contact with the healthcare provider and the provision of adequate information from the healthcare provider. There is limited evidence for negative associations between adherence and having HMO insurance, weekly costs of TNF-I, having a busy lifestyle, receiving contradictory information or delivery of information in an insensitive manner by the rheumatologist. 18 factors were unrelated to adherence. CONCLUSIONS: The strongest relation with adherence is found to be prior use of DMARDs before using anti-TNF and beliefs about the necessity of the medication. Because the last one is modifiable, this provides hope to improve adherence.