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: 1809

Is Team Care Better? a Comparison of Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Among Patients Cared for in Practices with Nurse Practitioners and Physicians Assistants Versus Rheumatologist Only

DH Solomon1,2, Liana Fraenkel3, Bing Lu1, Erika Brown1, Peter Hsun Tsao4, Elena Losina5, Jeffrey N. Katz6 and Asaf Bitton7, 1Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, 2Rheumatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, 3Rheumatology, Yale University School of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare Systems, New Haven, CT, 4Rheumatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 5Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, 6Rheumatology and Orthopedics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, 7Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA

Meeting: 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Disease Activity, nurse practitioners, outcome measures and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Physician Assistant

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

Title: Health Services Research: Improving Clinical Practice

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ACR)

Background/Purpose: The Affordable Care Act proposes more widespread use of mid-level providers (MLPs), such as nurse practitioners and physician assistants, but little is known about the process and outcomes of the care they provide. This is of particular interest in rheumatology, where there is a predicted workforce shortage by the year 2025. We set out to compare the outcomes of care provided by MLPs for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in rheumatology practices with that provided by rheumatologists alone.

Methods: This study was conducted in 7 rheumatology practices in the US – 4 with MLPs and 3 without. The primary outcome was RA disease activity, categorized as remission, low, moderate, or high, using standardized measures (e.g., DAS28, RAPID3, CDAI).  We abstracted the following information from medical records for patients with RA from the most recent 2 years: RA treatments, serologic status, disease duration, and disease activity measures. We compared patient characteristics and disease activity for visits across the MLP and rheumatologist only practices.  We performed a repeated measures analysis to compare disease activity for visits with MLPs versus those with rheumatologists. These contrasts were made with ordinal logistic regression and expressed as proportional odds ratios.  Sensitivity analyses also examined 1) the area under the curve (AUC) for disease activity over the 2-year study period (linear regression) and 2) the change in disease activity between visits (ordinal logistic regression).


Results:
Records from 301 patients, including 1982 visits were reviewed: 1168 visits with MLPs and 814 with rheumatologists. Overall, patients had a mean age of 61 years and 77% were female. 69% of patients seen by MLPs and 70% of those seen by rheumatologists were seropositive. In the primary adjusted analysis, patients seen in MLP practices were more likely to have better disease activity (OR 0.32, p = 0.004, reduced probability for higher disease activity) than those seen in practices with only rheumatologists (see Table). Similar trends were observed in the AUC analysis.  However, there were no differences in the change in disease activity comparing patients seen in practices with MLPs versus rheumatologist only.

Conclusion: While non-randomized trials are subject to confounding by indication, patients seen in practices with MLPs for RA had reduced disease activity over a 2-year observation period compared with those seen in rheumatology only practices; although no differences were observed in the change in disease activity between visits. Two competing possibilities emerge that further research can help clarify: patients seeing MLPs are less sick to begin with or their care is associated with better disease control when MLPs are part of the team.

Table: Categorical disease activity measures compared across patients seen in practices with mid-level providers versus those without, based on adjusted regression models*

Variable

Primary analysis

(OR, 95% CI) †

Secondary analysis, change between visits

(OR, 95% CI) †

Secondary analysis, area under the curve

(b coefficient)**

Mid level provider (vs not)

0.32 (0.17-0.60)

0.98 (0.94-1.03)

-6.35 (p = 0.0055)

Disease activity category at baseline

…

…

9.85 (p < 0.001)

Age, per year

0.99 (0.98-1.02)

1.00 (0.99-1.00)

-0.005 (p = 0.95)

Female gender

2.24 (1.09-4.61)

0.98 (0.93-1.02)

0.34 (p = 0.89)

Duration of RA, per year

1.18 (0.87-1.61)

1.01 (0.99-1.03)

0.92 (p = 0.59)

Seropositive

1.26 (0.69-2.30)

1.02 (0.98-1.06)

1.08 (p = 0.59)

DMARD use, any

0.64 (0.43-0.95)

0.99 (0.94-1.03)

-2.85 (p = 0.20)

* The Disease activity category at baseline was not entered into all analyses since it was part of the outcome.  Abbreviations: RA, rheumatoid arthritis; DMARD, disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug. † Odds ratio denotes the probability of a one level increase in disease activity, with odds ratios less than one denoting a reduced probability. They were calculated using a proportional odds model that accounted for the hierarchical clustering. ** The b coefficients denote the area under the disease activity curve for the 24 months, with scores of 0-3 interpolated for each month. They were calculated in generalized linear models.

 


Disclosure:

D. Solomon,
None;

L. Fraenkel,
None;

B. Lu,
None;

E. Brown,
None;

P. H. Tsao,
None;

E. Losina,
None;

J. N. Katz,
None;

A. Bitton,
None.

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

« Back to 2014 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/is-team-care-better-a-comparison-of-rheumatoid-arthritis-disease-activity-among-patients-cared-for-in-practices-with-nurse-practitioners-and-physicians-assistants-versus-rheumatologist-only/

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