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: 2469

How Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients and Rheumatologists Communicate during Clinic Visits When a New DMARD Is Prescribed

Lorie L. Geryk1, Susan J. Blalock2, Courtney A. Roberts2, Beth L. Jonas3 and Delesha M. Carpenter4, 1Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 2Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC, 3Thurston Arthritis Research Ct, University of North Carolina Thruston Arthritis Research Center, Chapel Hill, NC, 4Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina, Asheville, NC

Meeting: 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 28, 2016

Keywords: Clinical practice guidelines, Communication, DMARDs, patient engagement and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print
Session Information

Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2016

Title: Rheumatoid Arthritis – Clinical Aspects - Poster III: Treatment – Monitoring, Outcomes, Adverse Events

Session Type: ACR Poster Session C

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose:  Over the last two decades, survey and observational studies of drug-related consultations have consistently shown a lack of adequate medication related discussions between patients and providers. The purpose of this study is to describe medication-related discussions between patients and rheumatologists concerning prescription of a new DMARD. We specifically address whether patient-provider discussions cover clinical guideline recommendations for DMARD communication, including discussion of medication side effects, treatment options, etc.

Methods:  This observational study includes data from clinic visits of 38 RA patients (3 rheumatologists) that occurred in a southeastern state from May 2014 to December 2015. Patients were eligible if they were prescribed a new or different DMARD (never prescribed before) at their rheumatology appointment. Clinic visits were audio recorded and medication-related segments transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded to measure aspects of the following 15 DMARD topics concerning the DMARD prescribed during the clinic visit: dosage, how to take (e.g., with food), frequency, timing, duration, types of negative side effects, side effect severity, contraindications, long-term effectiveness, drug interactions, mechanism of action, cost, length of time until medication works, medication benefits, and strategies to reduce or monitor risk. Descriptive statistics were calculated using SPSS.

Results:  Approximately one third of patients (32%; n=12) had never taken a DMARD. The number of DMARDs rheumatologists discussed with patients ranged from one to seven (M=1.82, SD=1.40). The number of prescribed DMARD-related topics ranged from 7 to 14 (M=11.03, SD=1.73). No clinic visit addressed all 15 topics and rheumatologists initiated 88% of the topics. Patients initiated the most discussions related to the following topics: drug interactions (62%), long-term effectiveness (43%), and length of time until medication works (19%). Topics that were covered most often included types of negative side effects (100%) and strategies to reduce or monitor risk (97%). Cost was not covered in about one third (34%) of clinic visits – yet, cost was one of the top three topics for which patients (40%) asked the most question, the other two being drug interactions (67%) and types of negative side effects (42%). Rheumatologists discussed an average of 4.6 negative side effects (SD = 2.7, range 1-16). The majority of patients 84% (n=32) did not express concern about any side-effects.

Conclusion:  Our findings counter other studies showing patient-provider medication-related discussions lack breadth and results show that DMARD topics covered during RA patient-rheumatologist encounters address many guideline recommended topics. Findings highlight areas of strength as well as areas for improvement regarding patient-provider medication-related discussion.


Disclosure: L. L. Geryk, None; S. J. Blalock, None; C. A. Roberts, None; B. L. Jonas, None; D. M. Carpenter, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Geryk LL, Blalock SJ, Roberts CA, Jonas BL, Carpenter DM. How Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients and Rheumatologists Communicate during Clinic Visits When a New DMARD Is Prescribed [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2016; 68 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/how-rheumatoid-arthritis-patients-and-rheumatologists-communicate-during-clinic-visits-when-a-new-dmard-is-prescribed/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

« Back to 2016 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/how-rheumatoid-arthritis-patients-and-rheumatologists-communicate-during-clinic-visits-when-a-new-dmard-is-prescribed/

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