[Patient education in rheumatologic care--a review]

[Treat to target-participation of the patient]

An increase in general health literacy and a targeted patient information are important prerequisites for coping with the chronic disease in people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. The education programs of the Working Group of Regional Cooperative Rheumatism Centers in the German Society for Rheumatology (AGRZ), such as StruPI, the offers of the German Rheumatism League (Deutsche Rheuma-Liga) and other elements provide a framework for those affected and their relatives, in which a participative decision-making (PEF) on equal terms can be possible. The physician-patient communication changes in the sense of a PEF and hopefully leads to a sustainably better patient compliance. Non-medicinal treatment, comorbidities and changes in life style are important issues in such cases. The StruPI is an established format for information and education of patients, particularly in outpatient rheumatism patients. In the midterm patient education (outpatient and inpatient) and self-management courses will be offered and honored nationwide, analogue to other chronic diseases, e.g. asthma and diabetes. Patients can influence the course of the disease by life style changes. The treatment of chronic diseases can only function in the long term in a consensual partnership.

[How does the German Association against Rheumatism and Arthritis convey health literacy?]

The German Association against Rheumatism and Arthritis considers the improvement of health literacy as one of their most important tasks. In local groups people with arthritis have the chance to exchange experiences and to benefit from consultation. Individual experiences are merged into a collective knowledge. Numerous printed media as well as information and exchange via the internet help to improve health literacy. Self-management courses and patient education courses are specific instruments to improve the competences of people with arthritis to manage their own condition. Through exercise programs, which are offered locally, the Association strives to improve self-efficacy regarding exercise. A survey of the members showed that the activities of the patient association are well accepted and valued. The empowered patient has more and more become a partner in the micro-level communication with their doctor. On the macro-level, patient representatives play an important role in the committees of the German self-administration of health insurance and physician organizations.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy is as safe and feasible as open procedure: A meta-analysis

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).

METHODS: Meta-analysis was performed using the databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews. Articles should contain quantitative data of the comparison of LDP and ODP. Each article was reviewed by two authors. Indices of operative time, spleen-preserving rate, time to fluid intake, ratio of malignant tumors, postoperative hospital stay, incidence rate of pancreatic fistula and overall morbidity rate were analyzed.

RESULTS: Nine articles with 1341 patients who underwent pancreatectomy met the inclusion criteria. LDP was performed in 501 (37.4%) patients, while ODP was performed in 840 (62.6%) patients. There were significant differences in the operative time, time to fluid intake, postoperative hospital stay and spleen-preserving rate between LDP and ODP. There was no difference between the two groups in pancreatic fistula rate [random effects model, risk ratio (RR) 0.996 (0.663, 1.494), P = 0.983, I² = 28.4%] and overall morbidity rate [random effects model, RR 0.81 (0.596, 1.101), P = 0.178, I² = 55.6%].

CONCLUSION: LDP has the advantages of shorter hospital stay and operative time, more rapid recovery and higher spleen-preserving rate as compared with ODP.

[German patient version of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis]

The evidence-based recommendations on the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have enjoyed a high level of acceptance and circulation in Germany, as well as in other European countries. To make patient participation in the decision-making process regarding their disease easier, as well as to strengthen the physician-patient relationship, the ASAS and EULAR have set up an initiative to formulate a patient-friendly version of the recommendations, initially in English. In order that this lay version can also be used in German-speaking countries, a group predominantly comprising patients was formed to ensure that the German translation of this version has the broadest possible basis. In cooperation with the German (DVMB), Austrian (OVMB) and Swiss Morbus Bechterew Associations (SVMB), as well as the German Rheumatology League, patients from Germany, Austria and Switzerland with appropriate English skills were invited to a meeting in 2008. The aim of the translation was to leave the content unchanged while finding a level of speech easily understandable to the lay person. The translated text was considered as accepted when a minimum of 12 patients (>80%) gave their approval on the wording of the translation of individual recommendations in an open vote. The rheumatologist given the function of moderator was not entitled to vote. The level of approval for each recommendation was determined (0: no approval to 10: full approval). The 14 patients were able to translate the English patient version into German. Choice of words and style of speech were discussed intensively. Acceptance of the translation of the 10 recommendations was generally high. The content was clearly accepted with an approval rate of 8.4+/-1.6. This was the first time that patients, in cooperation with rheumatologists, have translated an international patient version on AS management into German under controlled conditions. The translation text was approved by the majority in terms of both form and content. Acceptance and circulation of the German patient version should be evaluated in the near future.

[Patient evaluation of the German version of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis]

On the initiative of the ASAS (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society) and EULAR (European League against Rheumatism), evidence-based recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) were drawn up, with healthcare professionals as the target group for these recommendations. To facilitate patient participation in the decision-making process with regard to their disease, and to further improve the doctor-patient relationship, the ASAS and EULAR are working on a patient-friendly version of the recommendations.In order to establish to what extent the ASAS/EULAR recommendations, as translated by German experts, can be understood by patients, the recommendations for health care professionals, together with an evaluation form, was distributed to 105 delegates of the German society for ankylosing spondylitis (Deutschen Vereinigung Morbus Bechterew, DVMB). Responders were questioned on text comprehension and their level of agreement (0: not agree at all to 10: fully agree). Space was also provided for additional comments.In total, 59 delegates filled out the questionnaire (rate of return: 56.2%). For recommendation Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7, text comprehension was moderate. On average, the recommendations were positively assessed with 8.38+/-1.9. Recommendation No. 4 (non-pharmacological therapy) was given the highest agreement (9.54+/-1.02), while recommendation No. 7 (corticosteroids, 6.54+/-2.55) received the lowest agreement. The acceptance of the recommendation was high with 87.9% questions answered.For the first time, the German expert translation of recommendations for the management of AS patients was evaluated by patients. The present translation met with broad approval. To minimize text comprehension problems, patients should be involved in compiling a future patient version.