ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 0570

Clarifying Misbeliefs About Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ): Developing an Evidence-Based HCQ Benefits vs. Risk Decision Aid (HCQ-SAFE) Per Low Health Literacy Standards

Shivani Garg1, Sancia Ferguson2, Betty Chewning3, Shelby Gomez4, Jon Keevil5 and Christie Bartels6, 1University of Madison, School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, 2University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, WI, 3University of Wisconsin, School of Pharmacy, Madison, WI, 4UW Health, Stoughton, WI, 5NA, Madison, WI, 6University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2022

Keywords: Decision analysis, Health Services Research, Qualitative Research, Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Sunday, November 13, 2022

Title: Abstracts: Measures and Measurement of Healthcare Quality

Session Type: Abstract Session

Session Time: 8:00AM-9:00AM

Background/Purpose: Studies report ~83% of SLE patients discontinue hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and many report suboptimal shared decision-making with their healthcare team. Moreover, patients report knowledge gaps on role of HCQ in improving survival in SLE, and inflated concerns about rare eye toxicity. In complex diseases, involving patients as partners to make therapy decisions can improve adherence and outcomes. Further, AHRQ calls for interventions meeting low health literacy standards. The objective was to describe the development and piloting of a decision aid (HCQ-SAFE) to facilitate shared decision making about HCQ’s safety and efficacy.

Methods: Based on prior decision aid development, HCQ-SAFE was developed via a collaborative process involving patients, clinicians, implementation scientists, and health literacy experts. Prototyping was informed by AHRQ low literacy principles and key themes about HCQ use from six patient & clinician focus groups. Experts (n=4) reviewed the first prototype and guided an iterative process to revise subsequent prototypes which were then reviewed and endorsed by patients (n=11) and clinicians (n=9). The final decision aid was implemented in four clinics during 40 visits to examine usability and feasibility. Usability was measured by patient-reported understanding of HCQ’s role in SLE after using HCQ-SAFE, and resolution of any decisional conflicts. We used a Likert scale to measure users’ likelihood to recommend HCQ-SAFE (NPS= net promoter score). We included “Extremely or very likely” as promoters and “extremely or very unlikely” as detractors and calculated NPS = %promoters – %detractors. Next, feasibility was determined by measuring percentage of visits using HCQ-SAFE, percent completed by a non-MD, and time spent to review HCQ-SAFE.

Results: The final HCQ-SAFE evidence-based shared decision-making laminated tool has data organized using pictograms and plain language across four risks of interest: a) organ damage, b) premature death, c) blood clots, & d) eye toxicity in HCQ users vs. non-users.

During visits a patient and clinician first review pictograms of organ damage risk in SLE, then see how risks decrease with HCQ (Fig 1A). Next, declines in risks of early death and blood clots in HCQ users (Fig 2A-B) vs. low risk of eye toxicity are reviewed (Fig 1B & circles in Fig 1A-2).

We used HCQ-SAFE during 40 patient visits, including 25% non-English speaking patients. All patients reported improved knowledge about damage-free survival benefits of HCQ in SLE (Table 1). Moreover, HCQ-SAFE increased patients requesting an eye referral for HCQ screening by 25%. Decisional conflicts were noted in 26% of visits that all resolved using HCQ-SAFE. HCQ-SAFE garnered high clinician & patient support and high likelihood to recommend (NPS = 100%; avg Likert score = 8.5). Finally, 97% of clinicians reported spending < 10 mins. to review HCQ-SAFE; 60% of discussions were led by a non-MD.

Conclusion: We created HCQ-SAFE, an evidence-based, feasible shared decision-making tool with patients and experts. HCQ-SAFE aims to enhance communication to improve knowledge, clarify misbeliefs, and engage patients in treatment decisions, including those with limited health literacy and proficiency in English.

Supporting image 1

Figure 1A. HCQ-SAFE decision aid pictogram of SLE organ damage risk and how the risk reduces with HCQ use; Figure 1B. HCQ-SAFE decision aid pictogram of the risk of eye toxicity with HCQ use over 10 and 20 years of use, and considerations to enhance adherence and address barriers.

Supporting image 2

Figure 2A. HCQ-SAFE decision aid pictogram of 3-year risk of death in SLE in HCQ non-users vs. users; Figure 2B. HCQ decision aid pictogram of blood clot risk, and declines with HCQ use

Supporting image 3

Table 1. Pilot testing of HCQ decision aid (HCQ-SAFE), n=40


Disclosures: S. Garg, None; S. Ferguson, None; B. Chewning, None; S. Gomez, None; J. Keevil, None; C. Bartels, Pfizer.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Garg S, Ferguson S, Chewning B, Gomez S, Keevil J, Bartels C. Clarifying Misbeliefs About Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ): Developing an Evidence-Based HCQ Benefits vs. Risk Decision Aid (HCQ-SAFE) Per Low Health Literacy Standards [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2022; 74 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/clarifying-misbeliefs-about-hydroxychloroquine-hcq-developing-an-evidence-based-hcq-benefits-vs-risk-decision-aid-hcq-safe-per-low-health-literacy-standards/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2022

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/clarifying-misbeliefs-about-hydroxychloroquine-hcq-developing-an-evidence-based-hcq-benefits-vs-risk-decision-aid-hcq-safe-per-low-health-literacy-standards/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology