Search

Objective: To compare the use of methotrexate (MTX), intramuscular (i.m.) gold, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisone for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment among patients managed by rheumatologists and nonrheumatologists., Methods: Multiple regression analysis to estimate the likelihood of starting treatment and response to treatment for patients managed by rheumatologists and nonrheumatologists. All regression analyses were adjusted for patient demographic and clinical characteristics., Results: Therapy with all agents studied was initiated more frequently for patients with RA with at least some contact with rheumatologists during the year than for those managed strictly by nonrheumatologists. The adjusted odds ratios for starts on these medications ranged from 1.14 for im gold to 15.11 for MTX for patients managed by rheumatologists compared to those managed by nonrheumatologists. However, due to the low frequency of initiation of treatment with most of these drugs for patients managed strictly by nonrheumatologists, only the odds ratio for prednisone reached statistical significance (OR = 2.94, p = 0.0082). In the year after initiation of therapy with these agents, patients managed by rheumatologists experienced better response to treatment than those managed by nonrheumatologists. These differences were statistically significant for MTX (p = 0.0447) and nearly significant for im gold (p = 0.0597)., Conclusion: These results provide evidence of systematic differences in the propensity of rheumatologists and nonrheumatologists to initiate therapy with these antirheumatic drugs. If the observed differences in initial response to treatment translate into substantial differences in longterm outcomes, then these results suggest that the welfare of patients with RA may be jeopardized by the current trend toward primary care and restricted access to rheumatologists.

Genitourinary manifestations of Wegener's granulomatosis (WG) are rare. We report 2 unusual cases of genitourinary WG, one in which the diagnosis was suggested by a cervical biopsy, and one case of recurrent WG presenting exclusively at a genitourinary site while the patient was taking methotrexate for maintenance of remission.

Objective: To estimate the variation among rheumatologists in clinical outcomes and frequency of office visits for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), after accounting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics and treatments prescribed., Methods: Multiple regression analysis using random effects for rheumatologists and adjustments for patient characteristics and treatments received, based on data derived from a panel study of persons with RA., Results: During the years 1984-1993, rheumatologists accounted for a moderate amount of the total variation in clinical outcomes and nearly one-third of the total variation in frequency of office visits. For example, in 1993 rheumatologist associated variation in 4 clinical outcomes ranged from 16 to 25%, while the variation in office visit frequency attributable to rheumatologists stood at 46% of the total variation. However, rheumatologist associated variation in clinical outcomes was not statistically significant in any year, while variation in office visits was highly significant in all years (p < or = 0.0001). Although there was an increase in the percentage of variation attributable to rheumatologists for all outcomes examined across the years of this study, the time trend reached statistical significance only for frequency of office visits (2.4% per year; p = 0.0135) and functional status (1.6% per year; p = 0.0034)., Conclusion: The magnitude and strength of rheumatologist associated variation in frequency of office visits, without comparable strength in the variation in clinical outcomes, may suggest inefficiencies in the use of resources for the care of persons with RA. Further work is needed to directly examine the relationship between health outcomes and resource utilization.

Objective: To determine the extent to which characteristics of rheumatologists and their practices explain the variation in their use of prednisone and 2nd line agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: We used multiple logistic regression to examine the relationship between the use of prednisone, hydroxychloroquine, intramuscular gold, and methotrexate, and the following categories of rheumatologist characteristics: professional experience, primary payment method, practice setting, location of rheumatology training, and demographic characteristics. Our explanatory variables also included 12 patient characteristics and a random effect term., Results: Much of the variation among rheumatologists in the use of these agents is explained by the rheumatologist characteristics. Depending on the agent, professional experience explained 15 to 54%, payment method 3 to 27%, practice setting 6 to 39%, training location 12 to 53%, and demographic characteristics 3 to 23% of the rheumatologist associated variation in use of each agent., Conclusion: There are identifiable characteristics of rheumatologists and their practices that strongly influence their treatment decisions for RA. These findings have important policy implications.

Objective: To determine whether treatment received for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is systematically different among individuals with different levels of formal education., Methods: Using 4,455 patient-years of observational data from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) RA panel, we estimated the relationship between patients' education level and treatment received for RA. We define RA treatment broadly in terms of both the use of specific medications and use of health services. Independent variables include spouse's education level, as well as demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic characteristics, which are potential cofounders of this relationship due to associations with education level or RA treatment., Results: Patients with RA with higher levels of formal education are more likely to be hospitalized or to undergo surgery for RA, even after differences in demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic characteristics are taken into account. In contrast, the use of specific medications was not systematically different among individuals with different education levels., Conclusion: The association of education level with use of health services may partially explain the association of education with RA outcomes. Further studies are needed to test this hypothesis formally.