ArticleBMC rheumatology2020
Room for improvement in non-pharmacological systemic sclerosis care? - a cross-sectional online survey of 650 patients.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a tool to map SSc pain sources, characteristics and management experiences: the SPIN Pain Assessment Tool.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Impact of hand function impairment on daily life of patients with systemic sclerosis: a qualitative study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- 'It helps me stay on track': patient experiences using a mobile app for self-management of systemic sclerosis with a focus on fatigue in women.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2026Article
- Protocol for the development of a tool to map systemic sclerosis pain sources, patterns, and management experiences: a Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network patient-researcher partnership.BMC rheumatology · 2024Article
- Patient Assessment Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) and its associations with quality of life among Swiss patients with systemic sclerosis: a mixed methods study.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Article
- Evidence and consensus-based recommendations for non-pharmacological treatment of fatigue, hand function loss, Raynaud's phenomenon and digital ulcers in patients with systemic sclerosis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Exercise as a multi-modal disease-modifying medicine in systemic sclerosis: An introduction by The Global Fellowship on Rehabilitation and Exercise in Systemic Sclerosis (G-FoRSS).Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology · 2021Review
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
BACKGROUND/
objectiveTo gain insight in the use of current systemic sclerosis (SSc) care provided by health professionals from the patient perspective. We focused on referral reasons, treatment goals, the alignment with unmet care needs, and outcome satisfaction.
methodsDutch SSc patients from 13 participating rheumatology departments were invited to complete an online survey. Descriptive statistics were used to describe current use of non-pharmacological care and outcome satisfaction. Reasons for referral and treatment goals were encoded in International Classification of Function and Disability (ICF) terms.
resultsWe included 650 patients (mean (standard deviation [SD]) age, 59.4 (11.4) years. 50% had contact with a health professional in the past year; 76.3% since disease onset. Physiotherapists were the most frequently visited in the past year (40.0%), followed by dental hygienists (11.4%) and podiatrists (9.2%). The three most common referral reasons were pain, joint mobility and cardiovascular functions. Fatigue, Raynaud's phenomenon, physical limitations, reduced hand function and joint problems were mentioned by more than 25% of all respondents as unmet needs. The proportion of patients treated in the past year by a health professional who were satisfied with knowledge and expertise of their health professionals was 74.4%; 73% reported improved daily activities and better coping with complaints. However, 48.9% perceived that the collaboration between rheumatologist and health professional was never or only sometimes sufficient.
conclusionDespite the high outcome satisfaction and good accessibility of health professionals, there are obstacles in the access to non-pharmacological care and communication barriers between health professionals and rheumatologists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.