C Kampling1, G Chehab, M Schneider, J G Richter. 1. Poliklinik für Rheumatologie, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Active involvement of patients in their care has led to better treatment and outcomes. Tight control concepts emphasize the need for regular assessments including patients' active involvement by self-monitoring. METHODS: The literature was screened with respect to published experiences of self-monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritides. The use of "patient-reported outcome" (PRO) instruments can facilitate self-monitoring. Potentially applicable PROs and their correlations to clinical parameters as well as modern data acquisition modes are presented. RESULTS: Some experiences for self-monitoring have been reported. Recommendations from national and international professional rheumatology societies do not yet consider self-monitoring; however, PROs might be used for self-monitoring but instructions for patients on "how to deal with self-monitored PRO values" are missing. CONCLUSION: Self-monitoring of inflammatory rheumatic diseases seems feasible. Further evaluation studies are warranted to guarantee an optimized direct patient involvement in their management beyond outpatient care in hospitals and private practices so that they can thus contribute to a better outcome.
BACKGROUND: Active involvement of patients in their care has led to better treatment and outcomes. Tight control concepts emphasize the need for regular assessments including patients' active involvement by self-monitoring. METHODS: The literature was screened with respect to published experiences of self-monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritides. The use of "patient-reported outcome" (PRO) instruments can facilitate self-monitoring. Potentially applicable PROs and their correlations to clinical parameters as well as modern data acquisition modes are presented. RESULTS: Some experiences for self-monitoring have been reported. Recommendations from national and international professional rheumatology societies do not yet consider self-monitoring; however, PROs might be used for self-monitoring but instructions for patients on "how to deal with self-monitored PRO values" are missing. CONCLUSION: Self-monitoring of inflammatory rheumatic diseases seems feasible. Further evaluation studies are warranted to guarantee an optimized direct patient involvement in their management beyond outpatient care in hospitals and private practices so that they can thus contribute to a better outcome.
Authors: L C Doward; A Spoorenberg; S A Cook; D Whalley; P S Helliwell; L J Kay; S P McKenna; A Tennant; D van der Heijde; M A Chamberlain Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Jaclyn Anderson; Liron Caplan; Jinoos Yazdany; Mark L Robbins; Tuhina Neogi; Kaleb Michaud; Kenneth G Saag; James R O'Dell; Salahuddin Kazi Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: L Gossec; M Dougados; N Rincheval; A Balanescu; D T Boumpas; S Canadelo; L Carmona; J-P Daurès; M de Wit; B A C Dijkmans; M Englbrecht; Z Gunendi; T Heiberg; J R Kirwan; E M Mola; M Matucci-Cerinic; K Otsa; G Schett; T Sokka; G A Wells; G J Aanerud; A Celano; A Dudkin; C Hernandez; K Koutsogianni; F N Akca; A-M Petre; P Richards; M Scholte-Voshaar; G Von Krause; T K Kvien Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2008-12-03 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Emilia Gvozdenović; Rosanne Koevoets; Ron Wolterbeek; Désirée van der Heijde; Tom W J Huizinga; Cornelia F Allaart; Robert B M Landewé Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 2.980