MDHAQ/RAPID3评分:标准化“科学”格式的定量患者病史数据,用于风湿病患者状态和护理质量的最佳评估。

Theodore Pincus, Isabel Castrejón
{"title":"MDHAQ/RAPID3评分:标准化“科学”格式的定量患者病史数据,用于风湿病患者状态和护理质量的最佳评估。","authors":"Theodore Pincus,&nbsp;Isabel Castrejón","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantitative measurement according to a laboratory test such as hemoglobin A1c or creatinine provides a \"gold standard\" for care of every individual with a specific diagnosis. By contrast, no single \"gold standard\" quantitative measure is available in rheumatic diseases. Laboratory tests are limited, and clinical decisions are based more on patient history and physical examination than laboratory tests. A quantitative patient history is provided by a self-report questionnaire as standardized, \"scientific\" data to compare from one visit to the next. Patient questionnaires for usual clinical care emphasize feasibility, acceptability to patients and physicians, and clinical utility, which are not considered in research questionnaires. Development of a multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) over 27 years is seen as a continuous quality improvement (CQI) rather than research activity, to account for all rather than a few selected patients for a research study. Both the traditional HAQ and MDHAQ are 2-page questionnaires, easily completed by patients in 5 to 10 minutes, although scoring a HAQ disability index (HAQ-DI) requires 42 seconds, compared to 5 seconds for an MDHAQ/RAPID3. The MDHAQ includes, within 2 pages: complex activities, psychological queries, visual analog scales (VAS) as 21 numbered circles rather than 10-cm lines, a fatigue VAS, RADAI (rheumatoid arthritis disease activity index) self-report joint count, traditional \"medical\" review of systems and recent medical history, and demographic data, as well as a data management system that incorporates medication data and laboratory tests, reports for physicians and patients, and flow sheets to compare a current visit with a previous visit.</p>","PeriodicalId":72485,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"MDHAQ/RAPID3 scores: quantitative patient history data in a standardized \\\"scientific\\\" format for optimal assessment of patient status and quality of care in rheumatic diseases.\",\"authors\":\"Theodore Pincus,&nbsp;Isabel Castrejón\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Quantitative measurement according to a laboratory test such as hemoglobin A1c or creatinine provides a \\\"gold standard\\\" for care of every individual with a specific diagnosis. By contrast, no single \\\"gold standard\\\" quantitative measure is available in rheumatic diseases. Laboratory tests are limited, and clinical decisions are based more on patient history and physical examination than laboratory tests. A quantitative patient history is provided by a self-report questionnaire as standardized, \\\"scientific\\\" data to compare from one visit to the next. Patient questionnaires for usual clinical care emphasize feasibility, acceptability to patients and physicians, and clinical utility, which are not considered in research questionnaires. Development of a multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) over 27 years is seen as a continuous quality improvement (CQI) rather than research activity, to account for all rather than a few selected patients for a research study. Both the traditional HAQ and MDHAQ are 2-page questionnaires, easily completed by patients in 5 to 10 minutes, although scoring a HAQ disability index (HAQ-DI) requires 42 seconds, compared to 5 seconds for an MDHAQ/RAPID3. The MDHAQ includes, within 2 pages: complex activities, psychological queries, visual analog scales (VAS) as 21 numbered circles rather than 10-cm lines, a fatigue VAS, RADAI (rheumatoid arthritis disease activity index) self-report joint count, traditional \\\"medical\\\" review of systems and recent medical history, and demographic data, as well as a data management system that incorporates medication data and laboratory tests, reports for physicians and patients, and flow sheets to compare a current visit with a previous visit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根据实验室测试的定量测量,如血红蛋白A1c或肌酐,为每个有特定诊断的个体提供了“金标准”。相比之下,风湿病没有单一的“黄金标准”定量测量方法。实验室检查是有限的,临床决定更多地基于病人的病史和体格检查,而不是实验室检查。定量的病史由自我报告问卷提供,作为标准化的“科学”数据,以比较从一次访问到下一次。通常临床护理的患者问卷强调可行性、患者和医生的可接受性以及临床效用,这些在研究问卷中没有考虑到。27年来多维健康评估问卷(MDHAQ)的开发被视为一种持续的质量改进(CQI),而不是研究活动,以考虑所有而不是少数选定的患者进行研究。传统的HAQ和MDHAQ都是两页的问卷,患者可以在5到10分钟内轻松完成,尽管HAQ残疾指数(HAQ- di)的评分需要42秒,而MDHAQ/RAPID3只需5秒。MDHAQ在两页内包括:复杂活动、心理询问、视觉模拟量表(VAS)(21个带编号的圆圈而不是10厘米线)、疲劳VAS、类风湿关节炎疾病活动指数(RADAI)自我报告关节计数、对系统和近期病史的传统“医学”审查、人口统计数据,以及包含药物数据和实验室测试的数据管理系统、医生和患者的报告以及将当前就诊与以前就诊进行比较的流程表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
MDHAQ/RAPID3 scores: quantitative patient history data in a standardized "scientific" format for optimal assessment of patient status and quality of care in rheumatic diseases.

Quantitative measurement according to a laboratory test such as hemoglobin A1c or creatinine provides a "gold standard" for care of every individual with a specific diagnosis. By contrast, no single "gold standard" quantitative measure is available in rheumatic diseases. Laboratory tests are limited, and clinical decisions are based more on patient history and physical examination than laboratory tests. A quantitative patient history is provided by a self-report questionnaire as standardized, "scientific" data to compare from one visit to the next. Patient questionnaires for usual clinical care emphasize feasibility, acceptability to patients and physicians, and clinical utility, which are not considered in research questionnaires. Development of a multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) over 27 years is seen as a continuous quality improvement (CQI) rather than research activity, to account for all rather than a few selected patients for a research study. Both the traditional HAQ and MDHAQ are 2-page questionnaires, easily completed by patients in 5 to 10 minutes, although scoring a HAQ disability index (HAQ-DI) requires 42 seconds, compared to 5 seconds for an MDHAQ/RAPID3. The MDHAQ includes, within 2 pages: complex activities, psychological queries, visual analog scales (VAS) as 21 numbered circles rather than 10-cm lines, a fatigue VAS, RADAI (rheumatoid arthritis disease activity index) self-report joint count, traditional "medical" review of systems and recent medical history, and demographic data, as well as a data management system that incorporates medication data and laboratory tests, reports for physicians and patients, and flow sheets to compare a current visit with a previous visit.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
B-cell therapies for rheumatoid arthritis. Focal neurological deficits due to a contrast enhancing lesion in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus: case report and review of literature. Anterior spinal cord syndrome in a patient with Behçet's disease. Symptomatic babesiosis in systemic lupus erythematosus: report of a case and review of the literature. Pregnancy in a patient with Wegener's granulomatosis: a case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1