Exploring the Quality of Communication Between Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and Physicians: Results of a Global Online Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".