Comorbidity management in inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a dual-perspective survey of patients and rheumatologists
Authors' conclusion
Comorbidity management in IRDs is poorly implemented in routine care, and perceptions of responsibility differ between patients and rheumatologists. Clearer role definitions, stronger guidance from rheumatology organisations, and practical tools are needed to improve implementation.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs) and rheumatologists in Germany2,213 patients with IRDs and 140 rheumatologists participated
- Participants
- 140 vs 2,213
- Exposure
- Rheumatologists vs patients: implementation of comorbidity management and perceived responsibility
- Rheumatologistsn = 140
- Patientsn = 2,213
- Outcome
- Patient-reported implementation of comorbidity management in routine care across all domains
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Patients
28.8%
mean
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Blood pressure monitoring implementation
Vaccination checks implementation
- No structured comorbidity screening in place (rheumatologists)
- 69.3%
Reported barriers
- Lack of time
- 91.4%
- Unclear responsibilities
- 48.6%
- Staff shortages
- 40.0%
- Lack of reimbursement
- 35.0%
Rheumatologists' preferred responsibility
- Shared responsibility with general practitioners (GPs) for documentation
- 61.4%
- Shared responsibility with GPs for screening
- 48.6%
- Treatment assigned to GPs alone
- 60.7%
Patients assigning primary responsibility to GPs
- Cardiovascular risk management
- 72.6%
- Vaccinations
- 73.8%
Original publication
Comorbidity management in inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a dual-perspective survey of patients and rheumatologists. Arthritis Res Ther. Published 23 October 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →