An Initiative to Improve Timely Glucocorticoid Tapering in Vasculitis.
Journal
Journal of clinical rheumatology : practical reports on rheumatic & musculoskeletal diseases
ISSN: 1536-7355
Titre abrégé: J Clin Rheumatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9518034
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2021
01 Dec 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
4
5
2021
medline:
26
11
2021
entrez:
3
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
High-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) are required in the initial treatment of systemic vasculitis. However, slow or delayed tapering can lead to unnecessary GC exposure and toxicity. In this quality improvement initiative, we aimed to increase appropriate GC tapering among newly referred patients awaiting specialty consultation at a tertiary vasculitis clinic. For each patient referred for anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) or large vessel vasculitis (LVV), recommendation-based GC tapering suggestions were faxed to referring physicians. To maximize uptake, the intervention format was modified according to feedback from referring physicians' offices. The proportion of new patients presenting to their first appointment who (1) had started to taper GCs, (2) were taking their target GC dose according to recommendations, (3) experienced a vasculitis flare during tapering were compared before (July 2017-January 2019) and after (February-October 2019) the intervention. Among 169 consecutive patients referred for AAV or LVV, the proportion who had started to taper GCs by their first visit increased from 84 of 117 (72%) preintervention to 49 of 52 (94%) postintervention (p < 0.01). Mean daily prednisone dose at first visit decreased from 29.9 (SD, 18) mg to 21.7 (SD, 14) mg (p < 0.01). However, the proportion who were ultimately taking "target" GC doses at their first visit did not significantly increase (72% vs. 77%). Disease flares during tapering were similar before and after the intervention (9% vs. 12%). Patients with AAV and LVV had increased GC tapering and lower GC doses at first visit following a preappointment intervention. Further strategies are needed to improve timely GC tapering in vasculitis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
High-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) are required in the initial treatment of systemic vasculitis. However, slow or delayed tapering can lead to unnecessary GC exposure and toxicity. In this quality improvement initiative, we aimed to increase appropriate GC tapering among newly referred patients awaiting specialty consultation at a tertiary vasculitis clinic.
METHODS
METHODS
For each patient referred for anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) or large vessel vasculitis (LVV), recommendation-based GC tapering suggestions were faxed to referring physicians. To maximize uptake, the intervention format was modified according to feedback from referring physicians' offices. The proportion of new patients presenting to their first appointment who (1) had started to taper GCs, (2) were taking their target GC dose according to recommendations, (3) experienced a vasculitis flare during tapering were compared before (July 2017-January 2019) and after (February-October 2019) the intervention.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among 169 consecutive patients referred for AAV or LVV, the proportion who had started to taper GCs by their first visit increased from 84 of 117 (72%) preintervention to 49 of 52 (94%) postintervention (p < 0.01). Mean daily prednisone dose at first visit decreased from 29.9 (SD, 18) mg to 21.7 (SD, 14) mg (p < 0.01). However, the proportion who were ultimately taking "target" GC doses at their first visit did not significantly increase (72% vs. 77%). Disease flares during tapering were similar before and after the intervention (9% vs. 12%).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with AAV and LVV had increased GC tapering and lower GC doses at first visit following a preappointment intervention. Further strategies are needed to improve timely GC tapering in vasculitis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33938498
doi: 10.1097/RHU.0000000000001744
pii: 00124743-202112000-00060
doi:
Substances chimiques
Glucocorticoids
0
Prednisone
VB0R961HZT
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e612-e615Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Miloslavsky EM, Naden RP, Bijlsma JW, et al. Development of a glucocorticoid toxicity index (GTI) using multicriteria decision analysis. Ann Rheum Dis . 2017;76:543–546.
Robson JC, Dawson J, Cronholm PF, et al. Patient perceptions of glucocorticoids in anti–neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody–associated vasculitis. Rheumatol Int . 2018;38:675–682.
Nassar K, Janani S, Roux C, et al. Long-term systemic glucocorticoid therapy: patients' representations, prescribers’ perceptions, and treatment adherence. Joint Bone Spine . 2014;81:64–68.
van der Goes MC, Jacobs JW, Boers M, et al. Patient and rheumatologist perspectives on glucocorticoids: an exercise to improve the implementation of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations on the management of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatic diseases. Ann Rheum Dis . 2010;69:1015–1021.
Muller S, O'Brien A, Helliwell T, et al. Support available for and perceived priorities of people with polymyalgia rheumatica and giant cell arteritis: results of the PMRGCAuk members' survey 2017. Clin Rheumatol . 2018;37:3411–3418.
McGeoch L, Twilt M, Famorca L, et al. CanVasc recommendations for the management of antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody–associated vasculitides. J Rheumatol . 2016;43:97–120.
Dasgupta B, Borg FA, Hassan N, et al. BSR and BHPR guidelines for the management of giant cell arteritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) . 2010;49:1594–1597.
Hellmich B, Agueda A, Monti S, et al. 2018 Update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of large vessel vasculitis. Ann Rheum Dis . 2020;79:19–30.
Gale S, Wilson JC, Chia J, et al. Risk associated with cumulative oral glucocorticoid use in patients with giant cell arteritis in real-world databases from the USA and UK. Rheumatol Ther . 2018;5:327–340.
Robson J, Doll H, Suppiah R, et al. Glucocorticoid treatment and damage in the anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody-associated vasculitides: long-term data from the European Vasculitis Study Group trials. Rheumatology (Oxford) . 2015;54:471–481.
Sarnes E, Crofford L, Watson M, et al. Incidence and US costs of corticosteroid-associated adverse events: a systematic literature review. Clin Ther . 2011;33:1413–1432.
Mendel A, Ennis D, Carette S, et al. Assessment of glucocorticoid tapering in large vessel and anti–neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody–associated vasculitides. Clin Exp Rheumatol . December 2020 [Online ahead of print].
Giguère A, Légaré F, Grimshaw J, et al. Printed educational materials: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev . 2012;10:CD004398.
Carli C, Bridges JF, Ask J, et al; Swedish Rheumatoid Arthritis Register. Charting the possible impact of national guidelines on the management of rheumatoid arthritis. Scand J Rheumatol . 2008;37:188–193.
Etchells E, Woodcock T. Value of small sample sizes in rapid-cycle quality improvement projects 2: assessing fidelity of implementation for improvement interventions. BMJ Qual Saf . 2018;27:61–65.
Fretheim A, Tomic O. Statistical process control and interrupted time series: a golden opportunity for impact evaluation in quality improvement. BMJ Qual Saf . 2015;24:748–752.
Shekelle PG, Sarkar U, Shojania K, et al. Patient Safety in Ambulatory Settings . Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2016.
Lorincz C, Drazen E, Sokol PE, et al. Research in Ambulatory Patient Safety 2000–2010: A 10-Year Review . Chicago, IL: American Medical Association; 2011.
Harrington JT, Walsh MB. Pre-appointment management of new patient referrals in rheumatology: a key strategy for improving health care delivery. Arthritis Rheum . 2001;45:295–300.
Mostofian F, Ruban C, Simunovic N, et al. Changing physician behavior: what works? Am J Manag Care . 2015;21:75–84.