IntroductionAn overarching principle for the management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a shared decision-making process between physicians and patients. The aim of this study is to assess the patient-physician relationship in a group of patients with PsA, by using the Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions (PEPPI) and CollaboRATE instruments.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional multicenter study where consecutive patients with PsA were enrolled. For each patient, the main demographic, comorbid conditions, and clinical data were collected, including the assessment of disease activity, function, quality of life, and impact of disease. PEPPI and CollaboRATE questionnaires were used, respectively, to evaluate the patient's perception of the patient-physician relationship and the shared decision-making process.ResultsA total of 81 patients with PsA were enrolled at four centers in Italy. Overall, our patients showed a high level of confidence in obtaining needed health care, with relatively high median (IQR) values of PEPPI (20; 16-23), and a good shared decision-making process, with high median (IQR) values of CollaboRATE questionnaire (7; 6-9). PEPPI and CollaboRATE scores showed a statistically significant inverse correlation with different clinical variables such as disease duration, Leeds Enthesitis Index, PsA impact of Disease, Health Assessment Questionnaire, pain, patient's global assessment of disease activity and clinical disease activity for PsA. The presence of comorbidities did not appear to be associated with lower values of PEPPI and CollaboRATE.ConclusionsIn this study, few patients with PsA were at risk of suboptimal communication with their physician. This phenomenon appeared to be primarily related to higher disease activity and burden.

Assessment of Patient-Physician Interactions in Psoriatic Arthritis: National Results of the ASSIST Study

Perrotta, Fabio Massimo
;
Scriffignano, Silvia;Lubrano, Ennio
2024-01-01

Abstract

IntroductionAn overarching principle for the management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a shared decision-making process between physicians and patients. The aim of this study is to assess the patient-physician relationship in a group of patients with PsA, by using the Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions (PEPPI) and CollaboRATE instruments.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional multicenter study where consecutive patients with PsA were enrolled. For each patient, the main demographic, comorbid conditions, and clinical data were collected, including the assessment of disease activity, function, quality of life, and impact of disease. PEPPI and CollaboRATE questionnaires were used, respectively, to evaluate the patient's perception of the patient-physician relationship and the shared decision-making process.ResultsA total of 81 patients with PsA were enrolled at four centers in Italy. Overall, our patients showed a high level of confidence in obtaining needed health care, with relatively high median (IQR) values of PEPPI (20; 16-23), and a good shared decision-making process, with high median (IQR) values of CollaboRATE questionnaire (7; 6-9). PEPPI and CollaboRATE scores showed a statistically significant inverse correlation with different clinical variables such as disease duration, Leeds Enthesitis Index, PsA impact of Disease, Health Assessment Questionnaire, pain, patient's global assessment of disease activity and clinical disease activity for PsA. The presence of comorbidities did not appear to be associated with lower values of PEPPI and CollaboRATE.ConclusionsIn this study, few patients with PsA were at risk of suboptimal communication with their physician. This phenomenon appeared to be primarily related to higher disease activity and burden.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40744-024-00655-4
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11695/134189
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact