Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2016
Components of treatment delay in rheumatoid arthritis differ according to autoantibody status: validation of a single-centre observation using national audit data.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pratt Arthur G, Lendrem Dennis, Hargreaves Ben, Aslam Osman, Galloway James B, Isaacs John D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether time to treatment following symptom onset differs between RA patients according to autoantibody status.
METHODS: A single-centre retrospective analysis of a UK early RA inception cohort was first undertaken to identify those components of the patient journey that differed by serological subtype. Data from a UK national audit of early inflammatory arthritis patients was accessed to replicate the key finding.
RESULTS: A total of 173 RA patients were diagnosed over a 31-month period, of whom 80 (46%) were ACPA/RF double-seropositive (ACPA(+)/RF(+)), 53 (31%) ACPA(-)/RF(-), 17 (10%) ACPA(+)/RF(-) and 23 (13%) RF(+)/ACPA(-) Overall, ACPA(+)/RF(+) patients experienced significantly longer symptom duration before DMARD initiation. This was accounted for by delays in their presentation to primary care following symptom onset-a finding that was robustly confirmed in an independent dataset of 2192 UK early RA patients. In contrast, ACPA(-)/RF(-) patients were significantly more likely to experience delays in DMARD initiation after presenting to secondary care.
CONCLUSION: Causes of treatment delays in early RA differ according to patients' autoantibody status. More insidious symptom onset and/or distinct health-seeking behaviours among ACPA(+)/RF(+) patients may contribute to late presentations in primary care, whereas ACPA(-)/RF(-) patients experience delayed diagnosis and treatment in secondary care. These observations inform the research agenda, potentially influencing the design of service delivery for early arthritis patients.
METHODS: A single-centre retrospective analysis of a UK early RA inception cohort was first undertaken to identify those components of the patient journey that differed by serological subtype. Data from a UK national audit of early inflammatory arthritis patients was accessed to replicate the key finding.
RESULTS: A total of 173 RA patients were diagnosed over a 31-month period, of whom 80 (46%) were ACPA/RF double-seropositive (ACPA(+)/RF(+)), 53 (31%) ACPA(-)/RF(-), 17 (10%) ACPA(+)/RF(-) and 23 (13%) RF(+)/ACPA(-) Overall, ACPA(+)/RF(+) patients experienced significantly longer symptom duration before DMARD initiation. This was accounted for by delays in their presentation to primary care following symptom onset-a finding that was robustly confirmed in an independent dataset of 2192 UK early RA patients. In contrast, ACPA(-)/RF(-) patients were significantly more likely to experience delays in DMARD initiation after presenting to secondary care.
CONCLUSION: Causes of treatment delays in early RA differ according to patients' autoantibody status. More insidious symptom onset and/or distinct health-seeking behaviours among ACPA(+)/RF(+) patients may contribute to late presentations in primary care, whereas ACPA(-)/RF(-) patients experience delayed diagnosis and treatment in secondary care. These observations inform the research agenda, potentially influencing the design of service delivery for early arthritis patients.