Are We on the Same Page? A Cross‐Sectional Study of Patient–Clinician Goal Concordance in Rheumatoid Arthritis
Authors' conclusion
One in 5 patient-clinician dyads had discordant treatment goals. Goal concordance was associated with higher medication adherence.
Study context
- Population
- Adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) seen at least once in the prior 12 months at 1 of 2 rheumatology clinics, and their clinicians
- Participants
- 204 patient-clinician dyads
- Exposure
- Goal-concordant vs goal-discordant patient–clinician dyads
- Outcome
- Patient–clinician goal concordance (patient's number 1 goal among clinician's top 3)
Methodological details2 rheumatology clinics, multivariable logistic regression
- 2 rheumatology clinics
- Multivariable logistic regression
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Goal discordance
Discordant
20%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | aOR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Higher medication adherence | 2.76 (1.01–7.56) | |
| 0.10.31310Adjusted odds ratio (log scale) |
Goals selected by both patient and clinician
- "Have less pain", % of dyads
- 81%
- "Have fewer problems doing daily activities", % of dyads
- 63%
- Otherwise, clinicians prioritized avoiding side effects; patients ranked improved sleep, fatigue and mood
Disease duration
- Longer disease duration associated with discordance (median 13.3 years among discordant vs 7 years, IQR 4-14)
- P = 0.039
Depressive symptoms
- Higher depressive symptoms associated with concordance (8.1% vs 24%)
- P = 0.04
Parts of this Brief are withheld: the automatic checks could not confirm them against the abstract.
Original publication
Are We on the Same Page? A Cross‐Sectional Study of Patient–Clinician Goal Concordance in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). Published 16 November 2022. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →