ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2010
[Quality of a multidisciplinary orthopaedic-rheumatological consultation].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimAn interdisciplinary approach plays an important role in orthopaedic rheumatology. The aim of this study was to test the quality of an interdisciplinary consultation, which analyzed a pool of orthopaedic patients in terms of rheumatological disease.
methodOrthopaedic patients (n=100) were transferred to a multidisciplinary team of experts in a two-stage selection process. Patient data were examined with regard to diagnosis and therapy. A patient interview analyzed the course of disease and effects of the consultation. Patients were questioned on the development of pain, diagnostics and therapy as well as their general satisfaction.
resultsRheumatological disease was diagnosed in 42% of patients, while specific anti-rheumatic therapy was started in 41%. An improvement in symptoms as a result of treatment was seen in 63% of cases. Patient examinations revealed an above-average level of satisfaction in 63% of patients.
conclusionInterdisciplinary consultation led to improved and faster diagnosis and therapy of rheumatological diseases, which was positively evaluated by the pool of patients treated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20632178What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.