Heidi A Zangi1, Mwidimi Ndosi2, Jo Adams3, Lena Andersen4, Christina Bode5, Carina Boström6, Yvonne van Eijk-Hustings7, Laure Gossec8, Jana Korandová9, Gabriel Mendes10, Karin Niedermann11, Jette Primdahl12, Michaela Stoffer13, Marieke Voshaar14, Astrid van Tubergen15. 1. Department of Rheumatology, National Advisory Unit on Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 2. School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK and Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 3. Centre for Innovation and Leadership in Health Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southampton Highfield, Southampton, UK. 4. Nyborg, Denmark. 5. Department of Psychology, University of Twente, Health & Technology, Enschede, The Netherlands. 6. Division of physiotherapy, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 7. Department of Patient & Care/ Department of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands CAPHRI, School for Public Health and Primary Care, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 8. Sorbonne Universités, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Paris, France Department of rheumatology, AP-HP, Pitié Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France. 9. Institute of Rheumatology, Prague, Czech Republic. 10. Department of National Team, Portuguese Cycling Federation, Lisbon, Portugal. 11. Institute of Physiotherapy, School of Health Professions, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland. 12. Institute for Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark Hospital of Southern Jutland, Aabenraa, Denmark King Christian X's Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, Graasten, Denmark. 13. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine 3, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 14. Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. 15. Department of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The task force aimed to: (1) develop evidence-based recommendations for patient education (PE) for people with inflammatory arthritis, (2) identify the need for further research on PE and (3) determine health professionals' educational needs in order to provide evidence-based PE. METHODS: A multidisciplinary task force, representing 10 European countries, formulated a definition for PE and 10 research questions that guided a systematic literature review (SLR). The results from the SLR were discussed and used as a basis for developing the recommendations, a research agenda and an educational agenda. The recommendations were categorised according to level and strength of evidence graded from A (highest) to D (lowest). Task force members rated their agreement with each recommendation from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). RESULTS: Based on the SLR and expert opinions, eight recommendations were developed, four with strength A evidence. The recommendations addressed when and by whom PE should be offered, modes and methods of delivery, theoretical framework, outcomes and evaluation. A high level of agreement was achieved for all recommendations (mean range 9.4-9.8). The task force proposed a research agenda and an educational agenda. CONCLUSIONS: The eight evidence-based and expert opinion-based recommendations for PE for people with inflammatory arthritis are intended to provide a core framework for the delivery of PE and training for health professionals in delivering PE across Europe. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVES: The task force aimed to: (1) develop evidence-based recommendations for patient education (PE) for people with inflammatory arthritis, (2) identify the need for further research on PE and (3) determine health professionals' educational needs in order to provide evidence-based PE. METHODS: A multidisciplinary task force, representing 10 European countries, formulated a definition for PE and 10 research questions that guided a systematic literature review (SLR). The results from the SLR were discussed and used as a basis for developing the recommendations, a research agenda and an educational agenda. The recommendations were categorised according to level and strength of evidence graded from A (highest) to D (lowest). Task force members rated their agreement with each recommendation from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). RESULTS: Based on the SLR and expert opinions, eight recommendations were developed, four with strength A evidence. The recommendations addressed when and by whom PE should be offered, modes and methods of delivery, theoretical framework, outcomes and evaluation. A high level of agreement was achieved for all recommendations (mean range 9.4-9.8). The task force proposed a research agenda and an educational agenda. CONCLUSIONS: The eight evidence-based and expert opinion-based recommendations for PE for people with inflammatory arthritis are intended to provide a core framework for the delivery of PE and training for health professionals in delivering PE across Europe. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Ana María Ortiz; Lucía Silva Fernández; Virginia Villaverde; Miguel Ángel Abad; José Ramón Maneiro; Gloria Candelas; Susana Gómez; Mónica Valderrama; María Montoro Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2020-10-20 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: J Patermann; I Ehlebracht-König; G Lind-Albrecht; E Genth; A Reusch; R Küffner; U Müller-Ladner; J Braun Journal: Z Rheumatol Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 1.372