痛风的质量护理评估。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Timothy S H Kwok, Priyanka Chandratre
{"title":"痛风的质量护理评估。","authors":"Timothy S H Kwok, Priyanka Chandratre","doi":"10.1007/s11926-025-01199-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Despite the availability of effective pharmacotherapy to lower serum urate (SUA) levels and consequently reduce the likelihood of flares, gout remains a poorly managed condition. Quality of care assessments are of paramount importance in evaluating the performance of health systems and providers in managing gout, spanning patient (micro), provider or team (meso), and organizational or system-wide (macro) levels. This review focuses on the conceptual underpinnings on how quality of care in gout management is defined and assessed, highlighting methodological challenges, study approaches and contemporary findings.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>We illustrate the advantages and pitfalls on the use of quality indicators as the reference by which gout clinical care is deemed to be \"optimal\". We further introduce pertinent processes/intermediaries of gout care under a conceptual framework for quality assessment. Overall, quality of gout care requires significant improvement, with widespread deficiencies across key parameters including urate lowering therapy (ULT) adherence (micro-level), SUA monitoring (meso-level) and treatment to target SUA levels on a population basis (macro-level). There are large care gaps across processes, intermediaries and outcomes of gout care. Since accurate quality assessment forms the foundational pillar of subsequent quality improvement, this review serves as a reference to advance quality of gout care assessments. Further initiatives are required to enhance ULT adherence, in particular, which is a key intermediary step to optimal gout care and yet remains suboptimal on a population level. The integration of Learning Health Systems is emerging as a promising platform for improving the quality of gout care.</p>","PeriodicalId":10761,"journal":{"name":"Current Rheumatology Reports","volume":"27 1","pages":"32"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality Care Assessment in Gout.\",\"authors\":\"Timothy S H Kwok, Priyanka Chandratre\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11926-025-01199-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Despite the availability of effective pharmacotherapy to lower serum urate (SUA) levels and consequently reduce the likelihood of flares, gout remains a poorly managed condition. Quality of care assessments are of paramount importance in evaluating the performance of health systems and providers in managing gout, spanning patient (micro), provider or team (meso), and organizational or system-wide (macro) levels. This review focuses on the conceptual underpinnings on how quality of care in gout management is defined and assessed, highlighting methodological challenges, study approaches and contemporary findings.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>We illustrate the advantages and pitfalls on the use of quality indicators as the reference by which gout clinical care is deemed to be \\\"optimal\\\". We further introduce pertinent processes/intermediaries of gout care under a conceptual framework for quality assessment. Overall, quality of gout care requires significant improvement, with widespread deficiencies across key parameters including urate lowering therapy (ULT) adherence (micro-level), SUA monitoring (meso-level) and treatment to target SUA levels on a population basis (macro-level). There are large care gaps across processes, intermediaries and outcomes of gout care. Since accurate quality assessment forms the foundational pillar of subsequent quality improvement, this review serves as a reference to advance quality of gout care assessments. Further initiatives are required to enhance ULT adherence, in particular, which is a key intermediary step to optimal gout care and yet remains suboptimal on a population level. The integration of Learning Health Systems is emerging as a promising platform for improving the quality of gout care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10761,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Rheumatology Reports\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Rheumatology Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11926-025-01199-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Rheumatology Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11926-025-01199-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述的目的:尽管有有效的药物治疗来降低血清尿酸(SUA)水平,从而减少发作的可能性,痛风仍然是一种管理不善的疾病。医疗质量评估对于评估卫生系统和提供者在痛风管理方面的表现至关重要,包括患者(微观)、提供者或团队(中观)以及组织或全系统(宏观)层面。本综述侧重于痛风管理中护理质量如何定义和评估的概念基础,强调方法学上的挑战、研究方法和当代研究结果。最近的研究结果:我们说明了优势和缺陷在使用质量指标作为参考,痛风临床护理被认为是“最佳”。我们进一步在质量评估的概念框架下介绍痛风护理的相关过程/中介。总体而言,痛风护理的质量需要显著改善,在关键参数方面存在广泛的缺陷,包括降低尿酸治疗(ULT)依从性(微观水平),SUA监测(中观水平)和以人群为基础的SUA水平目标治疗(宏观水平)。痛风护理的过程、中介和结果存在很大的护理差距。由于准确的质量评估是后续质量改进的基础支柱,本综述可作为改进痛风护理评估质量的参考。需要进一步的举措来提高ULT的依从性,特别是,这是优化痛风护理的关键中间步骤,但在人群水平上仍然是次优的。学习卫生系统的整合正在成为改善痛风护理质量的一个有前途的平台。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quality Care Assessment in Gout.

Purpose of review: Despite the availability of effective pharmacotherapy to lower serum urate (SUA) levels and consequently reduce the likelihood of flares, gout remains a poorly managed condition. Quality of care assessments are of paramount importance in evaluating the performance of health systems and providers in managing gout, spanning patient (micro), provider or team (meso), and organizational or system-wide (macro) levels. This review focuses on the conceptual underpinnings on how quality of care in gout management is defined and assessed, highlighting methodological challenges, study approaches and contemporary findings.

Recent findings: We illustrate the advantages and pitfalls on the use of quality indicators as the reference by which gout clinical care is deemed to be "optimal". We further introduce pertinent processes/intermediaries of gout care under a conceptual framework for quality assessment. Overall, quality of gout care requires significant improvement, with widespread deficiencies across key parameters including urate lowering therapy (ULT) adherence (micro-level), SUA monitoring (meso-level) and treatment to target SUA levels on a population basis (macro-level). There are large care gaps across processes, intermediaries and outcomes of gout care. Since accurate quality assessment forms the foundational pillar of subsequent quality improvement, this review serves as a reference to advance quality of gout care assessments. Further initiatives are required to enhance ULT adherence, in particular, which is a key intermediary step to optimal gout care and yet remains suboptimal on a population level. The integration of Learning Health Systems is emerging as a promising platform for improving the quality of gout care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: This journal aims to review the most important, recently published research in the field of rheumatology. By providing clear, insightful, balanced contributions by international experts, the journal intends to serve all those involved in the care and prevention of rheumatologic conditions. We accomplish this aim by appointing international authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas such as the many forms of arthritis, osteoporosis and metabolic bone disease, and systemic lupus erythematosus. Section Editors, in turn, select topics for which leading experts contribute comprehensive review articles that emphasize new developments and recently published papers of major importance, highlighted by annotated reference lists. An international Editorial Board reviews the annual table of contents, suggests articles of special interest to their country/region, and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Commentaries from well-known figures in the field are also occasionally provided.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信