Rheumatologists' quality of care for lupus: comparison study between a university and county hospital

Does Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Care Provided in a Lupus Clinic Result in Higher Quality of Care Than That Provided in a General Rheumatology Clinic?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the quality of care received by patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in 2 settings within the academic institution (a dedicated lupus clinic and a general rheumatology clinic) using validated SLE quality measures.

METHODS

One hundred fifty consenting, consecutive SLE patients receiving longitudinal care at the Rush University general rheumatology clinic (n = 73) or the subspecialty lupus clinic (n = 77) were recruited. An updated quality measure survey and retrospective medical chart review were used to evaluate each quality measure (n = 20). The overall and individual quality measure performance was calculated and compared between the 2 groups. Data on the number of SLE patients seen by each rheumatologist were collected to assess the relationship between SLE patient volume and quality measures.

RESULTS

Overall quality measure performance was significantly better in SLE patients receiving care at the lupus clinic (85.8% versus 70.2% of patients receiving care at the general rheumatology clinic; P = 0.001). Differences between the 2 groups were observed for sunscreen counseling (98.7% and 83.6%, respectively; P = 0.001), antiphospholipid antibody testing (71.4% and 37%, respectively; P < 0.001), pneumococcal vaccination (84.8% and 48.8%, respectively; P < 0.001), bone mineral density testing (94.2% and 54.5%, respectively; P < 0.001), drug counseling (92.2% and 80.8%, respectively; P = 0.04), use of a steroid-sparing agent (100% and 82%, respectively; P < 0.007), use of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (94.4% and 58.3%, respectively; P = 0.03), and cardiovascular disease risk assessment (40.3% and 15.1%, respectively; P = 0.01). There was a moderate correlation between physician volume and quality measure performance (ρ = 0.48, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the general rheumatology clinic, the dedicated lupus clinic had better quality measure performance in this cross-sectional single-center study. In our health care system, we also observed indicators suggesting that rheumatologists with a higher volume of SLE patients provide higher quality of care.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Successful management of complex conditions such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and comorbid conditions benefit from patient-reported outcomes (PRO). Measuring health-related quality of life with PROs provides SLE patients with an opportunity to participate in their treatment and to facilitate better communication with the multidisciplinary team involved in their care. Health outcomes research has produced well-validated instruments that can be used across diseases; others have been specifically developed for SLE. The use of generic and SLE-specific PROs depends on needs, including population monitoring, treatment decision making, clinical trials research, and for evaluating and comparing the effect of therapies.

Satisfaction with control of systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis: physician and patient perspectives

PURPOSE

Patient satisfaction with disease control of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an important component of medical management. This analysis evaluated patient and physician satisfaction with disease control of SLE, factors associated with satisfaction/dissatisfaction, and the degree of physician-patient concordance of these parameters.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from the US Adelphi Real World Lupus Disease Specific Programme^®, a cross-sectional survey of 50 rheumatologists, 25 nephrologists, and their patients with non-nephritis SLE (NNSLE) or lupus nephritis (LN).

RESULTS

Physicians reported moderate or severe disease activity in 25.0% of patients with NNSLE and in 50.5% of patients with LN, and were satisfied with disease control in 78.6% (132/168) and 73.8% (152/206) of patients, respectively. For patients, 75.8% (75/99) with NNSLE were satisfied with their current treatment, compared with 65.5% (74/113) with LN. Physician-patient agreement (70.7%) on the level of satisfaction was "slight" (kappa =0.1445) for NNSLE; patients were more frequently dissatisfied than physicians with regard to joint tenderness, fatigue, anxiety, pain on movement, malar rash, and photosensitivity. Physician-patient agreement (71.4%) on the level of satisfaction was "fair" (kappa =0.3695) for LN; patients expressed greater dissatisfaction than physicians for headache, photosensitivity, and anxiety, whereas physicians were more dissatisfied with regard to joint swelling, kidney function, and blood pressure control. In general, patients with NNSLE or LN who were dissatisfied (or whose physicians were dissatisfied) were more likely to have joint swelling, joint stiffness, malar rash, hair loss, depression, and fatigue, have moderate or severe disease, or to be currently experiencing disease flare.

CONCLUSION

These data highlight the patient and physician dissatisfaction with real-world disease control of SLE.