Patient-centred standards of care for adults with myositis

被引:3
作者
Lilleker J.B. [1 ,2 ]
Gordon P. [3 ]
Lamb J.A. [4 ]
Lempp H. [5 ]
Cooper R.G. [4 ,6 ]
Roberts M.E. [1 ]
Jordan P. [7 ]
Chinoy H. [2 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Greater Manchester Neuroscience Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Stott Lane, Salford
[2] Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, The University of Manchester, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester
[3] King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
[4] The University of Manchester, Centre for Integrated Genomic Medical Research, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, Manchester
[5] Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, Academic Rheumatology, London
[6] University of Liverpool, MRC-ARUK Institute for Ageing and Chronic Disease, Liverpool
[7] Myositis UK, Southampton
[8] Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Rheumatology Department, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford
基金
英国医学研究理事会; 英国科研创新办公室;
关键词
Delphi process; Idiopathic inflammatory myopathy; Myositis; Patient-centred care; Quality improvement; Standards of care;
D O I
10.1186/s41927-017-0002-7
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM, myositis) are a heterogeneous group of chronic autoimmune disorders causing considerable physical and mental health impact. There is a lack of formalised guidance defining best practice for the management of myositis, contributing to inconsistent care provision and some patients feeling isolated and unsupported. To address these issues, we evaluated the clinical services available to adults with myositis in the UK. We then created patient-centred standards of care using a structured process involving patients, their relatives and caregivers, physicians and allied healthcare professionals. Methods: After an initial focus group, the clinical services available to patients with myositis were evaluated using a patient-completed questionnaire. Draft standards of care were created, each addressing deficits in care provision identified by patients. In response to feedback, including a two-stage modified Delphi exercise, these draft standards were iteratively improved until consensus was reached. Accompanying plain language versions of the standards of care and an audit tool were also created. Results: We identified issues regarding diagnostic pathways, access to specialist services, advice and support regarding employment, medication-related adverse events and the treatment of extra-muscular manifestations. Fifteen standards of care were drafted. After modification, agreement was reached on eleven final standards of care. Conclusion: These patient-centred standards of care for adults with myositis provide a benchmark for the evaluation of local practice. Their implementation will promote consistent good practice across care providers and empower patients when seeking access to local services. © 2017 The Author(s).
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]  
Furst D.E., Amato A.A., Iorga R., Gajria K., Fernandes A.W., Epidemiology of adult idiopathic inflammatory myopathies in a U.S. managed care plan, Muscle Nerve, 45, pp. 676-683, (2012)
[2]  
Stoffer M.A., Smolen J.S., Woolf A., Et al., Development of patient-centred standards of care for osteoarthritis in Europe: the eumusc.net-project, Ann Rheum Dis, 74, pp. 1145-1149, (2015)
[3]  
Standards of Care for people with Connective Tissue, Diseases., (2007)
[4]  
Meyer A., Meyer N., Schaeffer M., Gottenberg J.-E., Geny B., Sibilia J., Incidence and prevalence of inflammatory myopathies: a systematic review, Rheumatology, 54, pp. 50-63, (2015)
[5]  
Truepenny P., Kaushik V., Lempp H., Polymyositis, BMJ, 344, (2012)
[6]  
Flodgren G., Hall A.M., Goulding L., Et al., Tools developed and disseminated by guideline producers to promote the uptake of their guidelines, Cochrane database Syst Rev., (2016)
[7]  
Schipper K., Bakker M., De Wit M., Ket J.C.F., Abma T.A., Strategies for disseminating recommendations or guidelines to patients: a systematic review, Implement Sci, 11, (2015)
[8]  
Cabana M.D., Rand C.S., Powe N.R., Et al., Why Don't Physicians Follow Clinical Practice Guidelines?, JAMA, 282, (1999)
[9]  
Dixon P.A., Kirkham J.J., Marson A.G., Pearson M.G., National Audit of Seizure management in Hospitals (NASH): results of the national audit of adult epilepsy in the UK, BMJ Open, 5, (2015)
[10]  
Rudd A.G., Irwin P., Rutledge Z., Et al., The national sentinel audit for stroke: a tool for raising standards of care, J R Coll Physicians Lond, 33, pp. 460-464, (1999)