14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Medically explained symptoms: a mixed methods study of diagnostic, symptom and support experiences of patients with lupus and related systemic autoimmune diseases

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The aim was to explore patient experiences and views of their symptoms, delays in diagnosis, misdiagnoses and medical support, to identify common experiences, preferences and unmet needs.

          Methods

          Following a review of LUPUS UK’s online forum, a questionnaire was posted online during December 2018. This was an exploratory mixed methods study, with qualitative data analysed thematically and combined with descriptive and statistically analysed quantitative data.

          Results

          There were 233 eligible respondents. The mean time to diagnosis from first experiencing symptoms was 6 years 11 months. Seventy-six per cent reported at least one misdiagnosis for symptoms subsequently attributed to their systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease. Mental health/non-organic misdiagnoses constituted 47% of reported misdiagnoses and were indicated to have reduced trust in physicians and to have changed future health-care-seeking behaviour. Perceptions of physician knowledge and listening skills were highly correlated with patient ratings of trust. The symptom burden was high. Fatigue had the greatest impact on activities of daily living, yet the majority reported receiving no support or poor support in managing it. Assessing and treating patients holistically and with empathy was strongly felt to increase diagnostic accuracy and improve medical relationships.

          Conclusion

          Patient responses indicated that timely diagnosis could be facilitated if physicians had greater knowledge of lupus/related systemic autoimmune diseases and were more amenable to listening to and believing patient reports of their symptoms. Patient priorities included physicians viewing them holistically, with more emotional support and assistance in improving quality of life, especially in relation to fatigue.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Updating the American college of rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Derivation and validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus.

              The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE. The classification criteria were derived from a set of 702 expert-rated patient scenarios. Recursive partitioning was used to derive an initial rule that was simplified and refined based on SLICC physician consensus. The SLICC group validated the classification criteria in a new validation sample of 690 new expert-rated patient scenarios. Seventeen criteria were identified. In the derivation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (49 versus 70; P = 0.0082) and had greater sensitivity (94% versus 86%; P < 0.0001) and equal specificity (92% versus 93%; P = 0.39). In the validation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (62 versus 74; P = 0.24) and had greater sensitivity (97% versus 83%; P < 0.0001) but lower specificity (84% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). The new SLICC classification criteria performed well in a large set of patient scenarios rated by experts. According to the SLICC rule for the classification of SLE, the patient must satisfy at least 4 criteria, including at least one clinical criterion and one immunologic criterion OR the patient must have biopsy-proven lupus nephritis in the presence of antinuclear antibodies or anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies. Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Rheumatol Adv Pract
                Rheumatol Adv Pract
                rheumap
                Rheumatology Advances in Practice
                Oxford University Press
                2514-1775
                2020
                26 February 2020
                26 February 2020
                : 4
                : 1
                : rkaa006
                Affiliations
                [r1 ] Behavioural Science Group, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge , Cambridge
                [r2 ] Patient and Public Involvement in lupus Research Group, Institute of Public Health , University of Cambridge, Cambridge
                [r3 ] The Louise Coote Lupus Unit, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital, London
                [r4 ] LUPUS UK, St James’ House , Romford
                [r5 ] Department of Rheumatology, University College London , London
                [r6 ] Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Science, University of Birmingham , Birmingham, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Melanie Sloan, Behavioural Science Group, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK. E-mail: mas229@ 123456medschl.cam.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8742-8311
                Article
                rkaa006
                10.1093/rap/rkaa006
                7197794
                32373774
                6b28a7c5-bc68-4fd1-a297-ecc447a86655
                © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 22 November 2019
                : 10 February 2020
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: LUPUS UK;
                Categories
                Original Article

                systemic lupus erythematosus,patient views,quality of life,patient–physician interaction,misdiagnoses,symptoms,uctd,diagnostic delays,medical support

                Comments

                Comment on this article