“It’s like a OneStopShop”: A Qualitative Study Exploring Patient Experiences in Receiving Interdisciplinary Team-Based Care for Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives Given the rising prevalence and management complexity of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), evidence-informed solutions are needed to provide high-quality care within the available workforce. Interdisciplinary team-based models of rheumatology care, defined as rheumatologist and 1 or more interdisciplinary health professionals (eg, physical therapists, occupational therapists, nurses) working collaboratively to deliver care, provide a promising solution, however there is limited understanding of patients’ experiences with this approach. We aimed to 1) explore the experiences of patients living with RMDs receiving interdisciplinary team-based care, and 2) understand patients’ perceptions of how team-based care impacts their rheumatic disease management. Methods Informed by qualitative description, this study was a secondary analysis of qualitative interviews collected as part of an implementation science case study of the Center of Arthritis Research Excellence (CArE), an interdisciplinary rheumatology care model in Newmarket, Ontario, Canada. Participants were purposively sampled for diversity in age, disease duration, gender, and geographic location. Interviews, lasting 45-60 minutes, included questions pertaining to patients’ experiences with team-based care and perceptions of impact on disease management. We inductively coded interview transcripts and constructed themes using thematic analysis. Results Fifteen participants were interviewed, 47% identified as female. Ten (67%) had inflammatory arthritis, 3 (20%) had other inflammatory rheumatic disease, and 2 (13%) had osteoarthritis. We constructed 2 overarching themes: 1) Improved Access to Care and 2) Comprehensive Care (Table 1). Participants described how an interdisciplinary rheumatology team resulted in improved access to diverse healthcare expertise, enhancing overall care efficiency. Team-based care led to quicker responses from interdisciplinary providers compared to traditional practices, according to participants. They perceived that a team-based model resulted in a holistic approach to care, addressing needs beyond what rheumatologists alone could offer. Extended consultations facilitated in-depth assessments, education, and support across all aspects of disease management. Participants appreciated the integrated “one-stop-shop” model, which minimized external referrals and reduced the number of appointments. The interdisciplinary approach fostered patient engagement, self-advocacy, and shared decision-making. Table 1. Themes and subthemes with illustrative quotes. Conclusion This study highlights the experiences of patients living with RMDs receiving care within an interdisciplinary team-based model of rheumatology care. A team-based approach was valued by patients for improving care access and providing comprehensive management through complementary expertise, resulting in greater efficiency and holistic management of their RMDs. These results support the increased use of interdisciplinary team-based models in rheumatology care. Future studies should explore patient experiences with team-based care across different sites and team structures.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,019 | 0,032 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».