Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNavarro-Compan, Victoria
dc.contributor.authorSmolen, Josef S.
dc.contributor.authorHuizinga, Tom
dc.contributor.authorLandewe, Robert
dc.contributor.authorFerraccioli, Gianfranco
dc.contributor.authorda Silva, Jose A.P.
dc.contributor.authorMoots, Robert J.
dc.contributor.authorKay, Jonathan
dc.contributor.authorvan der Heijde, Desiree
dc.date2022-08-11T08:08:34.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T15:59:26Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T15:59:26Z
dc.date.issued2015-09-01
dc.date.submitted2016-05-09
dc.identifier.citationRheumatology (Oxford). 2015 Sep;54(9):1630-9. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kev108. Epub 2015 Apr 14. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/kev108">Link to article on publisher's site</a>
dc.identifier.issn1462-0324 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/rheumatology/kev108
dc.identifier.pmid25877910
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/30664
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: To test the feasibility of collecting, storing, retrieving and analysing necessary information to fulfil a preliminary set of quality indicators (QIs) that have been proposed by an international task force in a large multinational clinical practice database of patients with RA. METHODS: Data from all 12 487 patients with 46 005 visits in the Measurement of Efficacy of Treatment in the Era of Outcome in Rheumatology database from January 2008 until January 2012 were analysed to test the feasibility of collecting information on 10 QIs: time to diagnosis; frequency of visits; assessment of autoantibodies and radiographs, disease activity and function; disease remission, low disease activity, normal function; time to first DMARD and type of first DMARD. For each QI, two aspects were assessed: information availability and target achievement. RESULTS: Information was available for < 50% of patients regarding the following QIs: time to diagnosis, assessment of ACPAs or radiographs, time to first DMARD and type of first DMARD. Information was available for function assessment in 49% of visits and 67% of patients and for disease activity assessment in 85% of visits and 86% of patients. Information relevant to the QI frequency of visits was available for all patients. Relevant information to calculate the proportion of patients who achieved a defined target could be obtained for all QIs. CONCLUSION: Collecting storing, retrieving and analysing the core data necessary to meaningfully assess quality of care is feasible in a multinational, practice-based electronic database.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=25877910&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a>
dc.relation.urlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/kev108
dc.subject*Advisory Committees
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectAntirheumatic Agents
dc.subjectArthritis, Rheumatoid
dc.subjectAsia
dc.subjectAutoantibodies
dc.subjectDatabases, Factual
dc.subjectEurope
dc.subjectFeasibility Studies
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subject*International Agencies
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectNorth America
dc.subjectQuality Assurance, Health Care
dc.subjectQuality Indicators, Health Care
dc.subjectRetrospective Studies
dc.subjectSeverity of Illness Index
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome
dc.subjectcare
dc.subjectquality indicator
dc.subjectrheumatoid arthritis
dc.subjectMusculoskeletal Diseases
dc.subjectRheumatology
dc.titleQuality indicators in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the METEOR database
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleRheumatology (Oxford, England)
dc.source.volume54
dc.source.issue9
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/faculty_pubs/941
dc.identifier.contextkey8575153
html.description.abstract<p>OBJECTIVE: To test the feasibility of collecting, storing, retrieving and analysing necessary information to fulfil a preliminary set of quality indicators (QIs) that have been proposed by an international task force in a large multinational clinical practice database of patients with RA.</p> <p>METHODS: Data from all 12 487 patients with 46 005 visits in the Measurement of Efficacy of Treatment in the Era of Outcome in Rheumatology database from January 2008 until January 2012 were analysed to test the feasibility of collecting information on 10 QIs: time to diagnosis; frequency of visits; assessment of autoantibodies and radiographs, disease activity and function; disease remission, low disease activity, normal function; time to first DMARD and type of first DMARD. For each QI, two aspects were assessed: information availability and target achievement.</p> <p>RESULTS: Information was available for < 50% of patients regarding the following QIs: time to diagnosis, assessment of ACPAs or radiographs, time to first DMARD and type of first DMARD. Information was available for function assessment in 49% of visits and 67% of patients and for disease activity assessment in 85% of visits and 86% of patients. Information relevant to the QI frequency of visits was available for all patients. Relevant information to calculate the proportion of patients who achieved a defined target could be obtained for all QIs.</p> <p>CONCLUSION: Collecting storing, retrieving and analysing the core data necessary to meaningfully assess quality of care is feasible in a multinational, practice-based electronic database.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathfaculty_pubs/941
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology
dc.source.pages1630-9


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record