Does socioeconomic status make a difference? A register-based study on the extent to which cardiovascular screening in patients with inflammatory arthritis leads to recommended follow-up in general practice

Patients' perspectives on adherence to cardiovascular screening consultation and lifestyle changes

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) poses a significant health burden, with patients facing a twofold higher risk of cardiovascular diseases compared to the general population. As a results, the international recommendations set forth by the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology, advocate for a structured cardiovascular (CV) risk management and adherence to a healthy lifestyle for patients with RA. Unhealthy lifestyle factors not only impact overall health but also worsen inflammation and hinder treatment response in patients with RA Despite these recommendations, there remains a knowledge gap regarding patients' attitudes towards screening participation and lifestyle changes. Therefore, the aims of this study were firstly to explore the perspectives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis on participation and adherence to cardiovascular screening. Secondly, to explore patients' perspectives on lifestyle changes.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews based on a hermeneutic approach were conducted. The analysis was guided by qualitative content analysis, employing an inductive approach.

RESULTS

Nine women and seven men, aged 47 to 76 years, diagnosed with RA, and who had attended at least one CV screening session, took part in the study. Two primary themes, along with four sub-themes, emerged from the analysis. The first main theme, Accepting an offer, encompassed the sub-themes of Engagement in the screening consultation and Risk awareness, reflecting participants' views on their involvement in, and commitment to, CV screening. The second theme pertained to participants' perspectives on lifestyle changes: Living with a chronic disease and embracing changes, described through the sub-themes of Motivation for lifestyle changes and Strategies to achieve lifestyle changes.

CONCLUSION

Motivations for taking part in the screening differed among the participants, ranging from simply accepting an invitation to joining as a proactive precaution. In general, there was unanimous agreement among the participants that the screening proved to be a positive encounter. While it may not have immediately prompted significant lifestyle alterations, it did enhance their awareness of risks and underscored the significance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle. Overall, the individual guidance and support for patients with rheumatoid arthritis should entail awareness of CV risk combined with support to lifestyle changes the participants want to pursue.

Participation in cardiovascular screening consultations, the who, when and why - A cohort study on patients with rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

In accordance with the EULAR recommendations, the Danish Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases have systematically invited patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment since 2011. Patients with high risk are invited to a follow-up screening after one year. To optimize the screening and tailor it to individual needs, information about who accepts vs. declines follow-up is needed. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore participation in systematic CV risk assessment among patients with RA. Furthermore, to explore differences between patients with low vs. high risk, and between patients with high risk who accept vs. decline follow-up.

METHODS

Data from 2,222 outpatients with RA in the period 2011-2021 were retrieved, and of these 1,522 were under 75 years and eligible to be invited. To assess the 10-year risk for CV death, the modified Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (mSCORE), derived by multiplying the SCORE by 1.5, was used. Logistic regression analyses were used to explore differences in CV risk factors (triglycerides, HbA1c, lifestyle factors) and measures of disease impact (pain, fatigue, patient global assessment, HAQ, EQ-5D-5L) between patients with low vs. high risk. Differences between high risk patients who accepted vs. declined follow-up were analysed using Wilcoxon rank sum test and chi-squared test for groups.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred forty-nine received a CV screening invitation and 91 declined participation. Patients with high risk had significantly longer disease duration (OR; 95 CI) (1.017; 1.002-1.032), higher levels of triglycerides (1.834; 1.475-2.280), HbA1C (1.046; 1.020-1.070), pain (1.006; 1.001-1.012), and HAQ-score (1.305; 1.057-1.612) compared to patients with low risk and they more often declined follow-up (43% vs. 28%, p < 0.001). Those who declined a follow-up invitation were older (p = 0.016) and had shorter disease duration (p = 0.006) compared to those who accepted follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A first CV screening consultation was accepted by most patients with RA, while only every other patient with high to very high CV risk adhered to a follow-up screening consultation. Neither measures of disease impact nor lifestyle factors were associated with adherence. Further studies are needed to explore the patients' motivation, barriers and facilitators for adherence or non-adherence to a follow-up consultation.