| Literature DB >> 33790568 |
Inês Leal1,2, Vasco C Romão3,4, Sofia Mano1,2, Nikita Khmelinskii3,4, Raquel Campanilho-Marques3,4, Cristina Ponte3,4, Carla Macieira3, Filipa Oliveira-Ramos3,4, Elsa Vieira-Sousa3,4, Carlos Miranda Rosa3, Walter Rodrigues1,2, Luís Abegão Pinto1,2, Carlos Marques-Neves1,2, João Eurico Fonseca3,4.
Abstract
Non-infectious uveitis (NIU) is a group of sight-threatening diseases that generates significant burden for the healthcare systems due to its adverse outcomes, irreversible structural complications in the eye with loss of visual function, limited clinical expertise and low-grade evidence for best practice. The usefulness of multidisciplinary care, specifically close collaboration between Rheumatologists and Ophthalmologists in NIU, has been emphasized in the literature. In this paper, the assessment tools and protocols used in our clinic are depicted and an overview of our activity with a brief description of the patients included in our registry, between 2018 and 2020 is provided. The cohort of 290 patients assessed in our NIU clinic, their demographics, sources of referral, details about immunosuppression treatment, and internal and external collaborations is described. This experience-based manuscript aims to describe the general functioning of our multidisciplinary NIU clinic, highlighting the benefits and drawbacks of multidisciplinary team management in patients with NIU, ultimately initiating a dialogue on what an NIU clinic should be and providing information for newly NIU clinics start-up. In conclusion, establishing a standardized and multidisciplinary clinic in NIU allows to systematically observe and follow-up this infrequent disease at a tertiary hospital level, thus improving quality of care delivery and research avenues.Entities:
Keywords: ophthalmology; rheumatology; uveitis
Year: 2021 PMID: 33790568 PMCID: PMC7997415 DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S292981
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Multidiscip Healthc ISSN: 1178-2390
Figure 2Diagnosis of adult (A) and pediatric patients (B) referred to the CHULN-NIU clinic.
Figure 1Milestones towards a successful ophthalmology-rheumatology multidisciplinary team (MDT). Adapted from Snipelisky, D. et al. How to Develop a Cardio- Oncology Clinic. Heart Fail. Clin. 13, 347–359 (2017), with permission from Elsevier.16
Focus Areas of CHULN NIU-Rheumatology Team
| Focus Area | |
|---|---|
| Principles for referral | Establishment of guidelines for referral |
Implementation of mechanism that allows identification of all eligible patients | |
Prior discussion of patients when there is uncertainty of eligibility | |
| Infrastructure and technology | Dedicated physical location where uveitis appointments occur |
Dedicated physical location where joint clinics occur | |
Electronic medical records used in this clinic: Uveite.pt and Reuma.pt that allow to collect data in a standardized way and gather data for research | |
Quick access when requesting blood tests for diagnostic purposes | |
| Appointments | Scheduled adult uveitis and pediatric uveitis appointments |
Scheduled joint ophthalmology-rheumatology appointments | |
| Meetings | Weekly dedicated biologics decision clinic |
Phone/video conference discussions organized whenever necessary | |
| Organizational human resources aspects | Team is formed by ophthalmology consultants with special interest and formal education in uveitis with significant support of the Rheumatology team from the same center |
Demographics and Referrals of the Patients Observed at the CHULN-NIU Clinic (June 2018–June 2020)
| Pediatric (n=53, 18.3%) | Adult (n=237, 81.7%) | All Patients | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 11.1±3.8 (range:2–18) | 42.8± 16.8 (range: 19–90) | 36.9±19.6 (range: 2–90) |
| Female | 36 (66.7) | 136 (57.6) | 172 (59.3) |
| Referral source | |||
| Ophthalmology | 16 (28.6) | 161 (68.2) | 177 (61.0) |
| Rheumatology | 35 (64.8) | 59 (25.0) | 94 (32.4) |
| Pediatrics | 3 (5.6) | 0 | 3 (1.0) |
| Emergency Medicine | 0 | 9 (3.8) | 9 (3.1) |
| Internal Medicine | 0 | 4 (1.7) | 4 (1.4) |
| Infectious disease department (%) | 0 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.3) |
| Occupational Medicine | 0 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.3) |
| Other institution | 0 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.3) |
Note: Continuous variables represented as mean±standard deviation, categorical variables represented as absolute frequency (%)
Figure 3Conventional synthetic DMARD treatment of NIU adult (A) and pediatric (B) patients.
Figure 4Biologic treatment of adult (A) and pediatric (B) patients.