Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29316341›Full record

Trial reportArthritis care & research2018

Benefits and Sustainability of a Learning Collaborative for Implementation of Treat-to-Target in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results of a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Phase II Clinical Trial.

Daniel H Solomon, Bing Lu, Zhi Yu, Cassandra Corrigan, Leslie R Harrold, Josef S Smolen, Liana Fraenkel, Jeffrey N Katz, Elena Losina

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Arthritis care & research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Daniel H SolomonBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Bing LuBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Zhi YuBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Cassandra CorriganBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Leslie R HarroldUniversity of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester.ORCID 0000-0002-0170-2747
Josef S SmolenMedical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Liana FraenkelYale School of Medicine and VA Connecticut Healthcare System, New Haven.
Jeffrey N KatzBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Elena LosinaBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

Trial of risk mangement for prevention of accelerated atherosclerosis in SLEP60AR047782 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI LOSINA, ELENA · 2001 to 2016
$18.8M
Joint Biology Consortium Resource-based CenterP30AR070253 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Peter A Nigrovic, Jeffrey Andrew Sparks · 2016 to 2026
$9.4M
Patient Centered Outcomes Research in RheumatologyK24AR055989 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI SOLOMON, DANIEL HAL · 2008 to 2017
$1.5M
Improving Decision Making in Patients with Rheumatic DiseaseK24AR060231 · NIAMS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI FRAENKEL, LIANA · 2011 to 2018
$1.2M
NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR055989NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR060231NIAMS NIH HHS K24-AR-060231NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR070253NIAMS NIH HHS P60 AR047782NIAMS NIH HHS P60-AR-047782
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe conducted a 2-phase randomized controlled trial of a learning collaborative to facilitate implementation of treat-to-target (T2T) to manage rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We found substantial improvement in implementation of T2T in phase I. Here, we report on a second 9 months (phase II), where we examined the maintenance of response in phase I and predictors of greater improvement in T2T adherence.

methodsWe recruited patients from 11 rheumatology sites and randomized them to either receive the learning collaborative during phase I or to a wait-list control group that received the learning collaborative intervention during phase II. The outcome was change in T2T implementation score (0-100, where 100 = best) from pre- to postintervention. The T2T implementation score was defined as a percent of components documented in visit notes. Analyses examined the extent to which the phase-I intervention teams sustained improvement in T2T, as well as predictors of T2T improvement.

resultsThe analysis included 636 RA patients. At baseline, the mean T2T implementation score was 11% in phase I intervention sites and 13% in phase II sites. After the intervention, T2T implementation score improved to 57% in the phase I intervention sites and to 58% in the phase II sites. Intervention sites from phase I sustained the improvement during the phase II (52%). Predictors of greater T2T improvement included having only rheumatologist providers at the site, academic affiliation of the site, having fewer providers per site, and the rheumatologist provider being a trainee.

conclusionImprovement in T2T remained relatively stable over a postintervention period.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansInterdisciplinary PlacementMaleMiddle AgedAntirheumatic Agents

Identifiers

PMID29316341
PMCPMC6033691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.