Don’t Be Afraid to Engage: Health Technologies for Patients & Rheumatologists

In a 2022 systematic review of telemedicine in rheumatology, Jackson et al. evaluated 36 studies and found patient satisfaction with telemedicine was high in a majority of them. However, the effect of telemedicine on primary outcomes for conditions, including RA, gout and systemic lupus erythematosus, varied. Overall, most studies found telemedicine to be as good as in-person care for disease activity control, patient satisfaction, total societal costs and other patient reported outcomes.⁷

Some researchers have noted that issues still exist regarding the confidence levels of rheumatology fellows-in-training to deliver virtual care. Thus, initiatives have been undertaken to create education materials to teach fellows and improve confidence levels.⁸

Clinical Pearls

Dr. Grainger concluded her lecture by summarizing the key priorities that will allow health technology to be helpful in future medical practice.

First, patients must be well educated on the uses and potential misuses of such technologies. They must understand their role in the clinician-patient relationship and should feel encouraged and empowered to successfully use these technologies.

Regarding real-world results, these technologies must demonstrate the ability to improve patient-reported and objective outcome measures, enhance quality of life and support patient well-being and independence.

Finally, with an ever-expanding plethora of potential technological interventions, rheumatologists must not neglect the elements of medicine that have always been important in caring for patients, such as attentive listening, empathy and the nuances of the physical examination. Thus, through her excellent talk, Dr. Grainger reflected the best of rheumatic care across the timespan—in the past, the present and into the future.

Jason Liebowitz, MD, is an assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Rheumatology at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York.

References

1. Knitza J, Mohn J, Bergmann C, et al. Accuracy, patient-perceived usability, and acceptance of two symptom checkers (Ada and Rheport) in rheumatology: Interim results from a randomized controlled crossover trial. Arthritis Res Ther. 2021 Apr 13;23(1):112.
2. Feuchtenberger M, Nigg AP, Kraus MR, et al. Rate of proven rheumatic diseases in a large collective of referrals to an outpatient rheumatology clinic under routine conditions. Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Oct 2;9:181–187.
3. Knevel R, Knitza J, Hensvold A, et al. Rheumatic?—A digital diagnostic decision support tool for individuals suspecting rheumatic diseases: A multicenter pilot validation study. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Apr 25;9:774945.
4. Lundberg K, Qin L, Aulin C, et al. Population-based user-perceived experience of Rheumatic?: A novel digital symptom-checker in rheumatology. RMD Open. 2023 Apr;9(2):e002974.
5. Wallace W, Chan C, Chidambaram S, et al. The diagnostic and triage accuracy of digital and online symptom checker tools: A systematic review. NPJ Digit Med. 2022 Aug 17;5(1):118.
6. Patricoski C. Alaska telemedicine: Growth through collaboration. Int J Circumpolar Health. 2004 Dec;63(4):365–386.
7. Jackson LE, Edgil TA, Hill B, et al. Telemedicine in rheumatology care: A systematic review. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2022 Oct;56:152045.
8. Bolster MB, Kolfenbach J, Poeschla A, et al. Incorporating telemedicine in rheumatology fellowship training programs: Needs assessment, curricular intervention and evaluation. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2023 Dec;75(12):2428–2434.