MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3197844272 · doi:10.1007/s40744-021-00367-z

Exploring the Quality of Communication Between Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and Physicians: Results of a Global Online Survey

2021· article· en· W3197844272 sur OpenAlexaff
Laura C. Coates, Valderílio Feijó Azevedo, Joseph C. Cappelleri, Jade Moser, Lihi Eder, Pascal Richette, Meng‐Yu Weng, Amit Garg, Amar Majjhoo, C.E.M. Griffiths, Pamela Young, Samantha Howland

Notice bibliographique

RevueRheumatology and Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Établissements canadiensWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchIncyteHorizon PharmaCelgeneBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyPfizerNational Psoriasis FoundationAmgen
Mots-clésMedicinePsoriatic arthritisFamily medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicineRheumatoid arthritis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Effective communication between patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and their physicians is important for optimizing treatment outcomes. We assessed the quality of patient–physician communication in terms of awareness and impact of PsA symptoms, their levels of satisfaction, and their perceptions of communications. A global online survey was conducted by The Harris Poll in adult patients with PsA and physicians managing patients with PsA in eight countries. Participating physicians were either rheumatologists or dermatologists seeing ≥ 10 and ≥ 5 patients with PsA per month, respectively. Patient and physician groups were unmatched. Patient–physician communication was assessed with 35–60 questions regarding discussion topics during consultations, levels of satisfaction with communication, and specific communication issues. A total of 1286 patients with PsA (983 and 303 whose primary treating physician was a rheumatologist or dermatologist, respectively) and 1553 physicians (795 rheumatologists and 758 dermatologists) completed the survey. Regardless of whether they were primarily treated by a rheumatologist or dermatologist, most patients reported a social (84% and 81%, respectively) or work (81% and 80%, respectively) impact of PsA, and a major/moderate negative impact on their physical activity levels (79% and 74%, respectively) or emotional/mental wellbeing (69% and 68%, respectively). Physician responses were generally consistent with this; however, physicians often appeared to under-recognize the extent to which PsA affects patients. Most (≥ 85%) patients and physicians were very/somewhat satisfied with their patient–physician communication, and most (≥ 86%) patients were comfortable raising their concerns/fears with their physician. However, > 40% of patients were identified as being at risk of suboptimal communication. These patients were significantly less likely to report their PsA symptoms even when asked, were less comfortable discussing the impacts of PsA with their physician, and were more likely to experience major/moderate impacts of PsA on their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Physicians often underestimate the impacts of PsA, compared with patients, and some patients may be at risk of suboptimal communication with their attending physician, which may worsen the HRQoL impacts of PsA. These findings highlight a need for ways to improve communication between patients with PsA and their healthcare providers. Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a disease that can cause swollen and painful joints, as well as skin psoriasis. To effectively treat PsA, it is important that doctors and patients communicate well. We used a survey to ask patients with PsA and doctors from around the world about their communications about PsA. We also asked how PsA affects patients’ quality of life. In total, 1286 patients and 1553 doctors took the survey. Most patients said that PsA affected their social and work lives. Similarly, PsA had a negative impact on physical activity and on emotional and/or mental wellbeing in most patients who answered the survey. Doctors answered similarly, but they were generally less likely to recognize how severely PsA can impact patients, compared with patients themselves. Most patients and doctors were happy with their patient–doctor communication, and most patients felt comfortable talking about their worries and/or fears with their doctor. However, some patients (about four out of 10) felt that communication with their doctors was not good; these patients were less likely/comfortable to talk about their PsA symptoms and the impacts of PsA with their doctor. PsA was also more likely to negatively impact these patients’ quality of life. This survey shows that it is important to find ways to improve communication between patients with PsA and their doctors.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,131
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,204

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,088
Tête enseignante GPT0,326
Écart entre enseignants0,237 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueRheumatology and TherapyMême sujetSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207