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}
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.