How do patients with systemic sclerosis experience currently provided healthcare and how should we measure its quality?

OBJECTIVES: To gain insight into SSc patients' perspective on quality of care and to survey their preferred quality indicators. METHODS: An online questionnaire about healthcare setting, perceived quality of care (CQ index) and quality indicators, was sent to 2093 patients from 13 Dutch hospitals. RESULTS: Six hundred and fifty patients (mean age 59 years, 75% women, 32% limited cutaneous SSc, 20% diffuse cutaneous SSc) completed the questionnaire. Mean time to diagnosis was 4.3 years (s.d. 6.9) and was longer in women compared with men (4.8 (s.d. 7.3) vs 2.5 (s.d. 5.0) years). Treatment took place in a SSc expert centre for 58%, regional centre for 29% or in both for 39% of patients. Thirteen percent of patients was not aware of whether their hospital was specialized in SSc. The perceived quality of care was rated with a mean score of 3.2 (s.d. 0.5) (range 1.0-4.0). There were no relevant differences between expert and regional centres. The three prioritized process indicators were: good patient-physician interaction (80%), structural multidisciplinary collaboration (46%) and receiving treatment according to SSc guidelines (44%). Absence of disease progression (66%), organ involvement (33%) and digital ulcers (27%) were the three highest rated outcome indicators. CONCLUSION: The perceived quality of care evaluated in our study was fair to good. No differences between expert and regional centres were observed. Our prioritized process and outcome indicators can be added to indicators suggested by SSc experts in earlier studies and can be used to evaluate the quality of care in SSc

Fast Track Algorithm: How To Differentiate A “Scleroderma Pattern” From A “Non-Scleroderma Pattern”

Objectives: This study was designed to propose a simple “Fast Track algorithm” for capillaroscopists of any level of experience to differentiate “scleroderma patterns” from “non-scleroderma patterns” on capillaroscopy and to assess its inter-rater reliability. Methods: Based on existing definitions to categorise capillaroscopic images as “scleroderma patterns” and taking into account the real life variability of capillaroscopic images described standardly according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Study Group on Microcirculation in Rheumatic Diseases, a fast track decision tree, the “Fast Track algorithm” was created by the principal expert (VS) to facilitate swift categorisation of an image as “non-scleroderma pattern (category 1)” or “scleroderma pattern (category 2)”. Mean inter-rater reliability between all raters (experts/attendees) of the 8th EULAR course on capillaroscopy in Rheumatic Diseases (Genoa, 2018) and, as external validation, of the 8th European Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EUSTAR) course on systemic sclerosis (SSc) (Nijmegen, 2019) versus the principal expert, as well as reliability between the rater pairs themselves was assessed by mean Cohen's and Light's kappa coefficients. Results: Mean Cohen's kappa was 1/0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.98) for the 6 experts/135 attendees of the 8th EULAR capillaroscopy course and 1/0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96) for the 3 experts/85 attendees of the 8th EUSTAR SSc course. Light's kappa was 1/0.92 at the 8th EULAR capillaroscopy course, and 1/0.87 at the 8th EUSTAR SSc course. C Conclusion: For the first time, a clinical expert based fast track decision algorithm has been developed to differentiate a “non-scleroderma” from a “scleroderma pattern” on capillaroscopic images, demonstrating excellent reliability when applied by capillaroscopists with varying levels of expertise versus the principal expert and corroborated with external validation.Wo