Impact of Musculoskeletal Ultrasound in an Outpatient Rheumatology Clinic

Objective

To evaluate the impact of musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) as a complementary method to clinical assessment on rapid diagnosis and therapeutic decisions in a busy outpatient rheumatology clinic.

Methods

Sixty patients with different musculoskeletal symptoms were included in the study. Three expert rheumatologists performed the clinical examination and filled out a standardized clinical report sheet with the following parameters: general and/or local diagnoses, planned systemic and/or local treatment, and their decision concerning the use of MSUS evaluation complementary to clinical examination. Another rheumatologist, blinded to clinical data, performed the MSUS assessment of the anatomic areas selected by the clinicians. The impact of the new information obtained by MSUS on the initial diagnosis and therapeutic strategy was estimated by the degree of change in the initial clinical diagnosis and therapy decisions.

Results

Of 60 patients (67 anatomic areas), MSUS was considered as necessary after clinical examination in 39 patients (65%), totaling 43 anatomic areas (64.17%). An overall change of the initial clinical diagnosis was present in 60% of the anatomic areas (P = 0.0175). In all of the anatomic areas (100%), the new diagnosis was more objective and detailed. An overall change of the initial systemic therapy was present in 25% of anatomic areas (P = 0.0014) and in 36% of anatomic areas (P = 0.095) for local therapy. A guided diagnostic aspiration was decided to be performed in 15% of anatomic areas and a guided therapeutic injection in 22% of anatomic areas.

Conclusion

Enhanced information obtained by MSUS evaluation leads to changes, with a significant impact on the initial diagnosis and treatment strategy designed after clinical examination.     

National survey of knowledge,attitude and practice of fibromyalgia among rheumatologists in China

Aim

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain and fatigue. It is a less frequently diagnosed disease in China, thus Chinese rheumatologists may have lower awareness of FM compared with colleagues in Western countries. The aim of this study is to investigate the perceptions of FM in Chinese rheumatologists and analyze their therapeutic approach in clinical practice.

Method

An anonymous questionnaire survey was conducted among a nationwide sample of Chinese rheumatologists at the 15th National Rheumatology Conference in 2010. The 20‐question survey included questions regarding background, work experience, perceptions of diagnosis and behaviors of treatment related to FM. Continuing medical education (CME) information was also collected in the survey.

Results

Seven hundred and seven rheumatologists responded to the questionnaire, a response rate of 60%. Less than one‐fifth of the respondents were experienced in dealing with FM. Although most of the respondents regarded FM as a distinct pathological entity, nearly 30% of Chinese rheumatologists believed that FM was only a psychological disorder. The respondents recognized some of the FM‐related symptoms, but had limited knowledge on the diagnostic criteria. Eighty percent of the respondents declared they had difficulties in treating FM patients. However, nearly all (90.8%) respondents believed that the prognosis of FM patients was usually benign. Our data also showed that most Chinese rheumatologists were eager for CME on FM.

Conclusion

The awareness and perception of FM are still low among Chinese rheumatologists. CME on FM is needed for improving the quality of health care in China.     

Musculoskeletal ultrasound training in rheumatology: the Belfast experience

OBJECTIVES: Despite the increasing use of musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) as a clinical tool in rheumatology, there is no consensus yet regarding the standards required to achieve a basic level of competence in the use of this imaging technique. A number of sonographers worldwide are developing curricula and standardizing teaching methods in order to improve training in MSUS for rheumatologists. In the meantime, clinicians are devising informal means of training in order to acquire these new skills. Here we describe the informal team approach to MSUS training adopted by a group of rheumatologists from the Regional Rheumatology Centre in Belfast, UK. METHODS: Over a 5-yr period, eight rheumatologists from Musgrave Park Hospital in Belfast used a variety of means to learn the basic skills of MSUS. RESULTS: Seven of the team underwent a formal assessment of their competency in a practical examination devised by an experienced sonographer. All were judged to have attained a basic competency in MSU. CONCLUSIONS: This Belfast experience shows what can be achieved despite the absence of formal MSUS training. Nevertheless, the development of recognized training programmes and international standards of competency are important goals on the way to achieving more widespread acceptance of MSUS as a useful tool in everyday clinical practice.     

American college of rheumatology quality indicators for rheumatoid arthritis: Benchmarking,variability, and opportunities to improve quality of care using the electronic health record

Objective

To measure how rheumatologists across our health system performed with the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) quality indicators (QIs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and methotrexate (MTX) drug safety, and to develop opportunities for improvement.

Methods

An electronic health record (EHR) review of 1,062 unique RA patients seen by 15 rheumatologists in a 1‐year period was performed. Percentage of each QI met, reasons why the metric was not met, and performance of rheumatologists based on years of experience were evaluated.

Results

The percentage met was high for QI‐2 (RA disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug use; 94%), QI‐3 (intervention if RA worse; 85%), and QI‐4 (MTX risks discussion; 87%). Percentage met was lower for QI‐1 (RA core data set; 69%), QI‐5 (MTX baseline studies; 41%), and QI‐6 (MTX followup studies; 46%). QI‐1 and QI‐5 were low due to most physicians missing a single test, and QI‐6 was low because of few physicians driving the percentage down. Better QI performance was seen in rheumatologists with ≤10 years versus >10 years of experience for QI‐1 (90% versus 64%; odds ratio [OR] 4.21, P = 0.004) and QI‐3 (96% versus 82%; OR 4.47, P = 0.019). EHR chart review for this population required 179.3 hours.

Conclusion

Measurement allows us to better understand the quality of care that we deliver. In this systematic benchmarking of the ACR QIs in a large RA cohort, performance was excellent in RA treatment–related QIs. Significant variability was noted in RA and MTX monitoring measures, which can be addressed using process redesign techniques.     

Challenges to expanding the clinical application of musculoskeletal ultrasonography (MSUS) among rheumatologists: from a second survey in Japan

Abstract

Our previous survey in 2008 revealed that only 22% of Japanese rheumatologists used musculoskeletal ultrasonography (MSUS) for patient management, because of insufficient educational opportunities. To clarify the current state of MSUS usage and to identify further challenges, we conducted a second survey between October 2010 through January 2011 by sending questionnaires to 200 randomly selected Japanese rheumatologists, consisting of 100 participants in a meeting in 2009 on imaging in rheumatic diseases and 100 board-certified rheumatologists. Among the respondents, a majority (85 and 67%, respectively) used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MSUS users had increased from 32 to 60% of meeting participants and from 11 to 27% of other rheumatologists. The majority of MSUS users had begun using MSUS within the previous 3 years. Whereas most respondents in the previous survey had been self-taught, in the current survey many had attended training courses or had received informal training from skilled users. Despite an increase in skills and equipment ownership, obstacles to implementing MSUS remained, most prominently a lack of time. In conclusion, training courses and informal training have contributed to the popularization of MSUS in Japan. To further increase MSUS usage, additional training opportunities and education about the advantages of MSUS will be needed.     

The 12th International Rheumatology Symposium in Tokyo

Abstract

We aimed to describe how often Japanese rheumatologists currently use musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS), and how they are currently being trained in the use of this imaging technique. Questionnaires were sent to 200 Japanese rheumatologists: 100 to participants attending the first Scientific Meeting of the Japanese Society of Imaging in Rheumatic Diseases in 2006, and 100 to other randomly selected rheumatologists certified by the Japan College of Rheumatology. A total of 139 questionnaires (74 from meeting participants, 65 from randomly selected rheumatologists) were completed and analyzed. Twenty-four of the 74 respondents (32.4%) in the meeting participants group used MSUS imaging for patient management, while only 7 of the 65 respondents (10.8%) in the certified rheumatologists group used MSUS imaging for patient management. Sixty-five of the 74 respondents (87.8%) in the meeting participants group and 54 of the 65 respondents (83.1%) in the certified rheumatologists group considered MSUS to be a useful tool. Only a minority of respondents used MSUS in the management of their patients. Lack of training in MSUS was the principal reason for not performing MSUS. Japanese rheumatologists would prefer future training in the form of intensive courses and training sessions.     

Musculoskeletal ultrasound--a state of the art review in rheumatology. Part 2: Clinical indications for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology

Rheumatologists remain divided on whether they should introduce musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) into their clinical practice. A central issue in the application of MSUS in clinical rheumatology is the need for proof of clinical relevance and improved patient care. There is now accumulating evidence that MSUS improves clinical diagnosis and intervention skills. High-resolution ultrasound is superior to clinical examination in the diagnosis and localization of joint and bursal effusion and synovitis. MSUS is the imaging modality of choice for the diagnosis of tendon pathology. MSUS is seven times more sensitive than plain radiography in the detection of rheumatoid erosions, allowing earlier diagnosis of progressive rheumatoid arthritis. Ligament, muscle, peripheral nerve and cartilage pathology can also be readily demonstrated by MSUS. There is exciting evidence that MSUS may potentially be used by rheumatologists to non-invasively diagnose and monitor not just joint and muscle disease but also nerve compression syndromes, scleroderma, vasculitis and Sj?gren's syndrome. Joint aspiration and injection accuracy can be improved by MSUS, with initial evidence confirming improved efficacy. As the number of rheumatologists performing MSUS increases and the technical capabilities of MSUS improve, there is likely to be a growing number of proven clinical indications for the application of MSUS in rheumatology practice. This paper reviews the evidence for the application of MSUS in rheumatology.     

Comparison of musculoskeletal ultrasound practices of a rheumatologist and a radiologist

OBJECTIVE: There is considerable debate regarding the role of the rheumatologist ultrasonographer and how this development will impact on musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) performed by radiologists. We compared the MSUS practices of a rheumatologist and a radiologist working within the same National Health Service Trust. METHODS: A retrospective review of MSUS reports of consecutive scans performed by a consultant rheumatologist with a special interest in MSUS and a consultant musculoskeletal radiologist. Reports were analysed for referring specialties, indications for MSUS, joint regions scanned, MSUS findings, frequency with which patients were referred for injection and how often injection was performed. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients were referred to the rheumatologist for MSUS of 282 joint regions (91% referred by rheumatologists). Of those, 84 (49%) patients had MSUS examination of more than one joint region, with up to five regions scanned per sitting. One hundred patients were referred to the radiologist for MSUS of 111 joint regions (49% referred by orthopaedic surgeons). The most frequently requested primary indication for MSUS performed by the rheumatologist was detection of synovitis [74 (44%) patients] while MSUS performed by the radiologist was most frequently for assessment for major structural changes [44 (44%) patients]. The rheumatologist performed MSUS-guided injection in 59 of 170 (35%) patients scanned and the radiologist in 13 of 100 (13%). CONCLUSION: MSUS performed by the rheumatologist was predominantly requested by rheumatologists to aid diagnosis of synovial and tendon inflammation and to guide injections, while MSUS performed by the radiologist was predominantly requested by orthopaedic surgeons to aid diagnosis of structural pathology. Curriculums in MSUS designed for rheumatologists may need to place appropriate emphasis on the identification of synovial and tendon inflammation, and injection guidance.     

A modular, flexible training strategy to achieve competence in diagnostic and interventional musculoskeletal ultrasound in patients with hip osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to establish a model of training and an assessment of competency in musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) diagnosis of hip synovitis and/or effusion and in MSUS-guided injection of the hip. METHODS: The 'trainee' (no previous experience in MSUS) was trained by an 'expert' [a rheumatologist who is a trainer on the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) MSUS course] using a modular approach focused on hip ultrasound only. This consisted of (i) a 1.5 h initial tutorial and practical demonstration and (ii) indirectly supervised non-continuous scanning of 40 hips over 5 h. Competency was assessed in three ways: (i) ability to obtain standard EULAR reference MSUS images of the hip of sufficient image quality, (ii) accuracy in diagnosis of synovitis or hip effusion by measurement of the anterior femur-capsule distance, and (iii) accuracy in ultrasound-guided hip aspiration and injection. RESULTS: After a period of scanning of 75 min (10 hips), the images obtained by the trainee were consistently graded as acceptable for routine clinical use. Next, blinded triplicate measurements of the anterior femur-capsule distance performed by the trainee and expert showed agreement regarding diagnosis of hip effusion (>7 mm thickness) in 16/17 cases of hip arthritis (kappa 0.876). The trainee performed 40 MSUS-guided hip injections (seven directly supervised followed by 33 indirectly supervised). After 10 consecutive MSUS-guided hip injections, the novice achieved a subsequent accuracy rate of 25/26 (96%) confirmed by radiographic localization of radiopaque contrast. CONCLUSIONS: Using a modular approach, a learner-centred curriculum and a self-directed learning strategy with a minimum of direct supervision, a trainee achieved competence in MSUS diagnosis of hip effusion/synovitis and in MSUS-guided hip aspiration/injection.     

Attitudes of United Kingdom rheumatologists to musculoskeletal ultrasound practice and training

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to describe what clinical rheumatologists currently use musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) for, how they are currently training and is the first study to survey rheumatologists to determine their preferences for MSUS training implementation. METHODS: 250 questionnaires were distributed at the British Society of Rheumatology Annual General Meeting (BSR AGM), 2005. RESULTS: 126 (50%) of questionnaires were completed by UK rheumatologists and were analysed. 117 (93%) of the respondents use MSUS imaging for patient management, with 41 (33%) indicating they perform MSUS themselves. Only two (2%) performed MSUS for >5 years. Rheumatologists use MSUS to image all peripheral joints-particularly the hands and feet-to assess joint and soft tissue inflammation and to guide joint injections. Lack of training in MSUS was the principal reason for not performing MSUS. Respondents expressed a preference for future training to be via a programme of regular sessions, with training delivered by either consultant radiologists or rheumatologists. Mentoring was the educational tool and assessment method of choice. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents use MSUS in the management of their patients, with a third performing MSUS themselves. The report indicates rheumatologists' preferences on how training should be delivered in the future.     

Challenges to expanding the clinical application of musculoskeletal ultrasonography (MSUS) among rheumatologists: from a second survey in Japan

Our previous survey in 2008 revealed that only 22% of Japanese rheumatologists used musculoskeletal ultrasonography (MSUS) for patient management, because of insufficient educational opportunities. To clarify the current state of MSUS usage and to identify further challenges, we conducted a second survey between October 2010 through January 2011 by sending questionnaires to 200 randomly selected Japanese rheumatologists, consisting of 100 participants in a meeting in 2009 on imaging in rheumatic diseases and 100 board-certified rheumatologists. Among the respondents, a majority (85 and 67%, respectively) used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MSUS users had increased from 32 to 60% of meeting participants and from 11 to 27% of other rheumatologists. The majority of MSUS users had begun using MSUS within the previous 3 years. Whereas most respondents in the previous survey had been self-taught, in the current survey many had attended training courses or had received informal training from skilled users. Despite an increase in skills and equipment ownership, obstacles to implementing MSUS remained, most prominently a lack of time. In conclusion, training courses and informal training have contributed to the popularization of MSUS in Japan. To further increase MSUS usage, additional training opportunities and education about the advantages of MSUS will be needed.     

Clinical implementation of musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology in Austria

The aim of the study is to assess the clinical implementation of musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) in rheumatology in Austria. A survey was conducted among Austrian rheumatologists and physicians of other specialties with a focus on rheumatology. The questionnaire was designed by the members of the Austrian Radiology–Rheumatology Initiative for Musculoskeletal UltraSound including the following items: demographics, access to MSUS and MSUS training, application of MSUS to support diagnosis, monitoring and treatment decisions, and obstacles for the routine performance of MSUS. Eighty-eight (21.9 %) out of the 402 surveyed physicians responded. No access to MSUS and/or inadequate training in the technique was more commonly reported by senior (>50 years; 64.3 and 67.7 %, respectively) than by younger physicians (16.7 %, p = 0.01 and 18.5 %, p < 0.001, respectively). The lowest availability of sonography was found among senior rheumatologists (25.0 %, p = 0.001 compared to the total group). MSUS is routinely used for diagnosis and/or monitoring purposes by 12.5 % of physicians and 20.5 % perform sonography in clinically unclear cases. A limited number of physicians apply the method to support treatment decisions and/or to evaluate treatment success. The most important obstacles for routine application of MSUS in rheumatology are limited access to ultrasound machines, lack of training/education in the technique, and time constraints in daily routine. Low access to high-end ultrasound devices, lack of training, and time constraints may explain the low appreciation of MSUS among Austrian physicians evaluating patients with rheumatic diseases.     

Musculoskeletal ultrasound--a state of the art review in rheumatology. Part 1: Current controversies and issues in the development of musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology

As we begin the 21st century, musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) is routinely used by an increasing number of rheumatologists throughout Europe and there is a growing interest in the application of MSUS in rheumatological practice in the UK. MSUS allows high-resolution, real-time imaging of articular and periarticular structures and has the advantages of being non-radioactive, inexpensive, portable, highly acceptable to patients and repeatable. There are a number of critical issues that need to be addressed in order to develop the role of MSUS within rheumatology. These include issues of equipment costs, training and certification and the relationship of rheumatologists and radiologists in advancing the field of MSUS. Rheumatologists must demonstrate the relevance of MSUS in their clinical practice through high-quality research. Emerging technologies such as power Doppler and 3D imaging will further improve imaging capabilities and the range of clinical applications of MSUS systems. This paper reviews how MSUS in rheumatology has evolved and the controversies and issues that rheumatologists must now address in developing MSUS as an indispensable, everyday clinical tool.     

Use of musculoskeletal ultrasound in Japan: a survey of practicing rheumatologists

We aimed to describe how often Japanese rheumatologists currently use musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS), and how they are currently being trained in the use of this imaging technique. Questionnaires were sent to 200 Japanese rheumatologists: 100 to participants attending the first Scientific Meeting of the Japanese Society of Imaging in Rheumatic Diseases in 2006, and 100 to other randomly selected rheumatologists certified by the Japan College of Rheumatology. A total of 139 questionnaires (74 from meeting participants, 65 from randomly selected rheumatologists) were completed and analyzed. Twenty-four of the 74 respondents (32.4%) in the meeting participants group used MSUS imaging for patient management, while only 7 of the 65 respondents (10.8%) in the certified rheumatologists group used MSUS imaging for patient management. Sixty-five of the 74 respondents (87.8%) in the meeting participants group and 54 of the 65 respondents (83.1%) in the certified rheumatologists group considered MSUS to be a useful tool. Only a minority of respondents used MSUS in the management of their patients. Lack of training in MSUS was the principal reason for not performing MSUS. Japanese rheumatologists would prefer future training in the form of intensive courses and training sessions.     

Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasonography in the Differential Diagnosis of Gallbladder Wall Thickening

Background and Aims

Differentiation of gallbladder (GB) carcinoma from benign GB wall thickening is challenging. The recent introduction of second-generation ultrasonic contrast agents has made contrast harmonic imaging with EUS possible. The aim of our study was to evaluate the utility of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) for the differential diagnosis of GB wall thickening.

Methods

Thirty-six consecutive patients with GB wall thickening imaged by CH-EUS and then underwent surgery were enrolled in this study. After the lesions were observed with conventional harmonic EUS (H-EUS), CH-EUS was performed with intravenous injection of 0.015 ml/kg of Sonazoid. Three reviewers with various levels of experience of EUS (Reviewer A: experienced endosonographer, B: EUS trainee, C: experienced gastroenterologist with expertise in transabdominal ultrasound but no EUS experience) were blinded to findings of recorded video of H-EUS and CH-EUS. The diagnostic accuracy of H-EUS and CH-EUS for malignant GB wall thickening was compared.

Results

Final diagnoses based on surgical histology were GB carcinoma in 16, cholecystitis in 11, adenomyomatosis in 6 and cholesterolosis in 3. Overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing malignant GB wall thickening of H-EUS and CH-EUS were 83.3 versus 89.6, 65 versus 98 % (p < 0.001) and 73.1 versus 94.4 % (p < 0.001). The inter-observer agreement for H-EUS was moderate (κ = 0.51), whereas that for CH-EUS was substantial (κ = 0.77). The inhomogeneous enhanced pattern on CH-EUS was a strong predictive factor of malignant GB wall thickening.

Conclusion

CH-EUS has the potential to improve the preoperative diagnostic accuracy and inter-observer agreement in the differential diagnosis of GB wall thickening.     

A randomized,double‐blind,controlled study of ultrasound‐guided corticosteroid injection into the joint of patients with inflammatory arthritis

Objective

Most corticosteroid injections into the joint are guided by the clinical examination (CE), but up to 70% are inaccurately placed, which may contribute to an inadequate response. The aim of this study was to investigate whether ultrasound (US) guidance improves the accuracy and clinical outcome of joint injections as compared with CE guidance in patients with inflammatory arthritis.

Methods

A total of 184 patients with inflammatory arthritis and an inflamed joint (shoulder, elbow, wrist, knee, or ankle) were randomized to receive either US‐guided or CE‐guided corticosteroid injections. Visual analog scales (VAS) for assessment of function, pain, and stiffness of the target joint, a modified Health Assessment Questionnaire, and the EuroQol 5‐domain questionnaire were obtained at baseline and at 2 weeks and 6 weeks postinjection. The erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C‐reactive protein level were measured at baseline and 2 weeks. Contrast injected with the steroid was used to assess the accuracy of the joint injection.

Results

One‐third of CE‐guided injections were inaccurate. US‐guided injections performed by a trainee rheumatologist were more accurate than the CE‐guided injections performed by more senior rheumatologists (83% versus 66%; P = 0.010). There was no significant difference in clinical outcome between the group receiving US‐guided injections and the group receiving CE‐guided injections. Accurate injections led to greater improvement in joint function, as determined by VAS scores, at 6 weeks, as compared with inaccurate injections (30.6 mm versus 21.2 mm; P = 0.030). Clinicians who used US guidance reliably assessed the accuracy of joint injection (P < 0.001), whereas those who used CE guidance did not (P = 0.29).

Conclusion

US guidance significantly improves the accuracy of joint injection, allowing a trainee to rapidly achieve higher accuracy than more experienced rheumatologists. US guidance did not improve the short‐term outcome of joint injection.

     

The role of ultrasound in the diagnosis and management of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) presents many diagnostic, management and research challenges for rheumatologists who wish to obtain early diagnosis, differentiate synovitis and enthesitis, monitor disease activity accurately and objectively, prevent the development of structural damage, deliver local therapy accurately, and obtain PsA tissue for research purposes. Musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) is widely used by European rheumatologists in their clinical practice to meet these challenges and has the potential to become the rheumatologist’s stethoscope in Europe and North America. This paper examines the evidence that MSUS can improve clinical evaluation of patients with PsA for synovitis and enthesitis, that MSUS is more sensitive than plain radiography in detecting structural damage in joints, that MSUS can improve the success of joint aspiration and guide biopsy of PsA tissues. Recent exciting developments in the management of PsA are detailed including the role of power Doppler in the diagnosis of enthesitis in PsA, the role of MSUS in objective monitoring of disease activity, the evaluation of MSUS in the diagnosis of sacroiliitis, and the use of MSUS to guide therapeutic injection of the sacroiliac joints.     

Magnetic resonance imaging versus musculoskeletal ultrasound in the evaluation of temporomandibular joint in rheumatoid arthritis patients

Aim of the work

To evaluate temporomandibular joint (TMJ) affection in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) versus musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) and to correlate the findings with clinical manifestations, disease activity and functional status.

Relative urgency for referral from primary care to rheumatologists: the Priority Referral Score

Objective

Timely access to rheumatology consultation is fundamental to appropriate and effective management of patients with musculoskeletal and autoimmune diseases. Yet, for a variety of reasons, limited and delayed access is commonplace. Moreover, information exchange for referral is often inadequate or poorly communicated. The objective of this work was to improve referral from primary care to rheumatology by formulating and testing a clinically coherent, reliable, and non–diagnosis‐dependent Priority Referral Score (PRS).

Methods

Using a deliberative process, a clinical panel of 10 primary care providers (PCPs) and rheumatology specialists reviewed clinical case scenarios and engaged in a highly iterative process to develop criteria, definitions, and weights for the PRS, a linear 100‐point scale to rate the relative urgency of referral. Following tool formulation, clinicians uninvolved with the process tested the PRS against their clinical judgment.

Results

The PRS comprises 8 criteria, with 2–4 levels for each criterion, and each having a weight generated through conjoint analysis, which forced choices around the comparative urgency of all of the criteria and levels. The PRS showed a strong correlation between clinical rankings of rheumatologists and PCPs in both the deliberative panel, and the physicians subsequently involved in the testing of the PRS.

Conclusion

No standardized priority‐setting criteria are available for the full range of primary care referrals to rheumatologists. The PRS had face value with panelists and provided acceptable interrater and intrarater reliability when tested with other rheumatologists and PCPs. Pilot testing with other clinicians and in other settings is justified and prerequisite to use in clinical practice.     

Role of musculoskeletal ultrasonography in the detection of subclinical synovitis in oligo and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis children

Aim of the work

To study the ability of ultrasound to detect subclinical synovitis in children with oligoarticular and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and to assess the disease activity according to the clinical, laboratory, and musculoskeletal ultrasonographic (MSUS) evaluation.