Update to a Systematic Review on Quality Measures for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Racheal Githumbi,Steven J Katz,Jessica Widdifield,Claire E H Barber
{"title":"Update to a Systematic Review on Quality Measures for Rheumatoid Arthritis.","authors":"Racheal Githumbi,Steven J Katz,Jessica Widdifield,Claire E H Barber","doi":"10.3899/jrheum.2024-1314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nThis work aims to provide an update on a previously published systematic review on quality measures (QMs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform future measure development and endorsement efforts.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nWe searched published and grey literature sources from January 2018-July 2023. Included sources were limited to those that targeted RA patients, either exclusively or alongside other rheumatic conditions and were guided by a clear consensus-building methodology. We extracted QMs and categorized them into topic and subtopics. Extracted measures were then reviewed for similarity with the previously extracted set from a published systematic review. Non-duplicative measures were labelled as \"new\".\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThe updated search resulted in 2395 citations from which 339 studies were selected for full text review. From these, a total of six studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria resulting in the extraction of 156 QMs, along with 31 additional QMs extracted from 87 grey literature sources. Amongst the 187 extracted QMs, most were duplicative and/or similar to previously developed measures (68%, n= 127). 60 were identified as \"new\". New QMs were primarily structural (50%, n= 30) and process measures (33%, n= 20). New QMs frequently addressed the topic of health care delivery (35%, n= 21).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nWhile this review identified new QMs that reflect various reassuring trends in healthcare quality assessment, most were duplicative/similar to existing measures. This highlights the need for a centralized way to reduce redundancy in QM development efforts, and enable easy dissemination of QMs to optimize care for individuals with RA.","PeriodicalId":501812,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Rheumatology","volume":"218 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.2024-1314","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE This work aims to provide an update on a previously published systematic review on quality measures (QMs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform future measure development and endorsement efforts. METHODS We searched published and grey literature sources from January 2018-July 2023. Included sources were limited to those that targeted RA patients, either exclusively or alongside other rheumatic conditions and were guided by a clear consensus-building methodology. We extracted QMs and categorized them into topic and subtopics. Extracted measures were then reviewed for similarity with the previously extracted set from a published systematic review. Non-duplicative measures were labelled as "new". RESULTS The updated search resulted in 2395 citations from which 339 studies were selected for full text review. From these, a total of six studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria resulting in the extraction of 156 QMs, along with 31 additional QMs extracted from 87 grey literature sources. Amongst the 187 extracted QMs, most were duplicative and/or similar to previously developed measures (68%, n= 127). 60 were identified as "new". New QMs were primarily structural (50%, n= 30) and process measures (33%, n= 20). New QMs frequently addressed the topic of health care delivery (35%, n= 21). CONCLUSION While this review identified new QMs that reflect various reassuring trends in healthcare quality assessment, most were duplicative/similar to existing measures. This highlights the need for a centralized way to reduce redundancy in QM development efforts, and enable easy dissemination of QMs to optimize care for individuals with RA.
类风湿关节炎质量评价系统综述的最新进展。
本研究旨在更新先前发表的类风湿关节炎(RA)质量措施(QMs)的系统综述,为未来的措施开发和批准工作提供信息。方法检索2018年1月- 2023年7月的已发表文献和灰色文献。纳入的来源仅限于针对RA患者的来源,无论是单独的还是与其他风湿病一起,并以明确的共识建立方法为指导。我们提取了qm,并将它们分为主题和子主题。然后对提取的测量值与先前从已发表的系统评价中提取的集的相似性进行审查。不重复的措施被标记为“新”措施。结果更新后的检索结果为2395条引用,其中339项研究被选为全文综述。从这些研究中,共有6项研究符合纳入/排除标准,从而提取了156个qm,以及从87个灰色文献来源中提取的31个额外的qm。在提取的187个质量管理指标中,大多数是重复的和/或与以前开发的测量方法相似(68%,n= 127)。60个被确定为“新”。新的质量管理主要是结构性的(50%,n= 30)和过程措施(33%,n= 20)。新的质量管理机制经常涉及卫生保健提供的主题(35%,n= 21)。结论:虽然本综述确定了新的质量管理机制,反映了医疗质量评估的各种令人放心的趋势,但大多数是重复的/与现有措施相似的。这突出了在质量管理开发工作中需要一种集中的方式来减少冗余,并使质量管理能够轻松传播,以优化对RA患者的护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信