电子共病:电子共病评估在识别炎症性关节炎患者共病情况中的评估

Y. ElMiedany, M. Elgaafary, N. ElAroussy, S. Youssef, S. Bahlas, M. Hegazi
{"title":"电子共病:电子共病评估在识别炎症性关节炎患者共病情况中的评估","authors":"Y. ElMiedany, M. Elgaafary, N. ElAroussy, S. Youssef, S. Bahlas, M. Hegazi","doi":"10.4172/2167-7921.1000258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: 1. To assess the validity of an electronically comorbidity assessment strategy to identify comorbid conditions among inflammatory arthritis patients in standard practice. 2. To evaluate the impact of e-comorbidity assessment on the patients’ care and adherence to therapy.Methods: A cohort of 112 RA and 111 PsA subjects diagnosed according to RA ACR/EULAR criteria and PsA CASPAR criteria were followed longitudinally for 36 months. The patients were classified into a study group (112 patients) whose electronic patient-reported comorbidities were compared to a control group of 111 patients who were managed according to standard protocols. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the electronic data entry were compared to ICD-10 medical record (reference standard) and rheumatology clinic visits outcomes.Results: The sensitivity for identifying comorbidities using the electronic approach (median, 99.2%; interquartile range [IQR]: 96%-100%) outperformed those recorded using using ICD-10 codes (median, 66%; IQR: 50%-74%); and those recorded using clinic letters (median, 38%; IQR: 32%-54%). The median PPV and NPV were 97.7% (IQR: 96-100%) and 99.6% (IQR: 99-100%) for the e-comorbidity tool Vs 61.8% (IQR: 41%-76%) and 97.4% (IQR: 91%-98%) for the ICD-10 codes, physician recorded comorbidity respectively. The patients’ adherence to antirheumatic therapy was significantly (p<0.1) higher in the studied group.Conclusions: e-comorbidity assessment offered a specific and dynamic approach tailored to the patient’s needs over the 3-years study period, which is applicable in standard practice. Patient reported e-comorbidity outperformed the standard medical recording systems and can have a role in healthcare management and research.","PeriodicalId":91304,"journal":{"name":"Journal of arthritis","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"E-Comorbidity: Evaluation of the Electronic Comorbidity Assessment in Identifying Comorbid Conditions among Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis\",\"authors\":\"Y. ElMiedany, M. Elgaafary, N. ElAroussy, S. Youssef, S. Bahlas, M. Hegazi\",\"doi\":\"10.4172/2167-7921.1000258\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: 1. To assess the validity of an electronically comorbidity assessment strategy to identify comorbid conditions among inflammatory arthritis patients in standard practice. 2. To evaluate the impact of e-comorbidity assessment on the patients’ care and adherence to therapy.Methods: A cohort of 112 RA and 111 PsA subjects diagnosed according to RA ACR/EULAR criteria and PsA CASPAR criteria were followed longitudinally for 36 months. The patients were classified into a study group (112 patients) whose electronic patient-reported comorbidities were compared to a control group of 111 patients who were managed according to standard protocols. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the electronic data entry were compared to ICD-10 medical record (reference standard) and rheumatology clinic visits outcomes.Results: The sensitivity for identifying comorbidities using the electronic approach (median, 99.2%; interquartile range [IQR]: 96%-100%) outperformed those recorded using using ICD-10 codes (median, 66%; IQR: 50%-74%); and those recorded using clinic letters (median, 38%; IQR: 32%-54%). The median PPV and NPV were 97.7% (IQR: 96-100%) and 99.6% (IQR: 99-100%) for the e-comorbidity tool Vs 61.8% (IQR: 41%-76%) and 97.4% (IQR: 91%-98%) for the ICD-10 codes, physician recorded comorbidity respectively. The patients’ adherence to antirheumatic therapy was significantly (p<0.1) higher in the studied group.Conclusions: e-comorbidity assessment offered a specific and dynamic approach tailored to the patient’s needs over the 3-years study period, which is applicable in standard practice. Patient reported e-comorbidity outperformed the standard medical recording systems and can have a role in healthcare management and research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91304,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of arthritis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of arthritis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-7921.1000258\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of arthritis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-7921.1000258","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目标:1。评估电子共病评估策略在标准实践中识别炎症性关节炎患者共病状况的有效性。2.评估电子共病评估对患者护理和治疗依从性的影响。方法:对112名根据RA ACR/EULAR标准和PsA-CASPAR标准诊断的RA和111名PsA受试者进行了36个月的纵向随访。将患者分为一个研究组(112名患者),将电子患者报告的合并症与对照组(111名患者)进行比较,对照组根据标准方案进行管理。将电子数据输入的敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值与ICD-10病历(参考标准)和风湿病门诊就诊结果进行比较。结果:使用电子方法识别合并症的敏感性(中位数,99.2%;四分位间距[IQR]:96%-100%)优于使用ICD-10代码记录的敏感性(中值,66%;IQR:50%-74%);以及使用诊所信函记录的患者(中位数,38%;IQR:32%-54%)。电子共病工具的PPV和NPV中位数分别为97.7%(IQR:96-100%)和99.6%(IQR~99-100%),而ICD-10代码的共病中位数分别为61.8%(IQR:41%-76%)和97.4%(IQR:91%-98%)。研究组患者对抗风湿病治疗的依从性显著高于对照组(p<0.1)。结论:在3年的研究期间,电子共病评估提供了一种针对患者需求的特定且动态的方法,适用于标准实践。患者报告的电子共病表现优于标准医疗记录系统,可以在医疗管理和研究中发挥作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
E-Comorbidity: Evaluation of the Electronic Comorbidity Assessment in Identifying Comorbid Conditions among Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis
Objectives: 1. To assess the validity of an electronically comorbidity assessment strategy to identify comorbid conditions among inflammatory arthritis patients in standard practice. 2. To evaluate the impact of e-comorbidity assessment on the patients’ care and adherence to therapy.Methods: A cohort of 112 RA and 111 PsA subjects diagnosed according to RA ACR/EULAR criteria and PsA CASPAR criteria were followed longitudinally for 36 months. The patients were classified into a study group (112 patients) whose electronic patient-reported comorbidities were compared to a control group of 111 patients who were managed according to standard protocols. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the electronic data entry were compared to ICD-10 medical record (reference standard) and rheumatology clinic visits outcomes.Results: The sensitivity for identifying comorbidities using the electronic approach (median, 99.2%; interquartile range [IQR]: 96%-100%) outperformed those recorded using using ICD-10 codes (median, 66%; IQR: 50%-74%); and those recorded using clinic letters (median, 38%; IQR: 32%-54%). The median PPV and NPV were 97.7% (IQR: 96-100%) and 99.6% (IQR: 99-100%) for the e-comorbidity tool Vs 61.8% (IQR: 41%-76%) and 97.4% (IQR: 91%-98%) for the ICD-10 codes, physician recorded comorbidity respectively. The patients’ adherence to antirheumatic therapy was significantly (p<0.1) higher in the studied group.Conclusions: e-comorbidity assessment offered a specific and dynamic approach tailored to the patient’s needs over the 3-years study period, which is applicable in standard practice. Patient reported e-comorbidity outperformed the standard medical recording systems and can have a role in healthcare management and research.
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
Ophthalmologic Manifestations Arthritis Gait analysis methods in rehabilitation Epicondyle a n d Apophysitis Methods in rehabilitation Rheumatoid Arthritis: Chronic Inflammatory Autoimmune Disease
×
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