Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/140105
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Attitudes and practices in the laboratory monitoring of conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs by rheumatologists and rheumatology trainees
Author: Tsakas, J.J.
Liew, D.F.L.
Adams, C.L.
Hill, C.L.
Proudman, S.
Whittle, S.
Buchbinder, R.
Robinson, P.C.
Citation: BMC Rheumatology, 2022; 6(1):59-1-59-8
Publisher: BMC
Issue Date: 2022
ISSN: 2520-1026
2520-1026
Statement of
Responsibility: 
James J. Tsakas, David F. L. Liew, Cameron L. Adams, Catherine L. Hill, Susanna Proudman, Samuel Whittle, Rachelle Buchbinder, and Philip C. Robinson
Abstract: Objectives: There is scant research about laboratory monitoring in people taking conventional synthetic diseasemodifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) for rheumatic disease. Our objective was to conduct a scoping study to assess the range of current attitudes and the variation in practice of laboratory monitoring of csDMARDs by rheumatologists and trainees. Methods: Australian and overseas rheumatologists or trainees were invited through newsletter, Twitter and personal e-mail, to complete an anonymous online survey between 1 February and 22 March 2021. Questions focused on laboratory tests requested by csDMARD prescribed, frequency/pattern of monitoring, influence of additional factors and combination therapy, actions in response to abnormal tests, and attitudes to monitoring frequencies. Results were presented descriptively and analysed using linear and logistic regression. Results: There were 221 valid responses. Most respondents were from Australia (n = 53, 35%) followed by the US (n = 39, 26%), with a slight preponderance of women (n = 84, 56%), ≥ 11 years in rheumatology practice (n = 83, 56%) and in mostly public practice (n = 79, 53%). Respondents had a wide variation in the frequency and scheduling of tests. In general, respondents reported increasing monitoring frequency if patients had numerous comorbidities or if both methotrexate and leflunomide were being taken concurrently. There was a wide variety of responses to abnormal monitoring results and 27 (40%) considered that in general, monitoring tests are performed too frequently. Conclusions: The results demonstrated a wide variation in the frequency of testing, factors that should influence this, and what responses to abnormal test results are appropriate, indicates a likely lack of evidence and the need to define the risks, benefits and costs of different csDMARD monitoring regimens.
Keywords: Adverse events
Laboratory monitoring
Methotrexate
Value-based healthcare
Description: Published online: 17 October 2022
Rights: © The Author(s) 2022. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
DOI: 10.1186/s41927-022-00290-y
Grant ID: NHMRC
Published version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41927-022-00290-y
Appears in Collections:Medicine publications

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
hdl_140105.pdfPublished version791.82 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.