ArticleJournal of scleroderma and related disorders2020
Pulmonary arterial hypertension screening practices in scleroderma patients among Canadian rheumatologists.
Article in Journal of scleroderma and related disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attitudes and barriers to pulmonary arterial hypertension screening in systemic sclerosis patients: A survey of UK-based rheumatologists.Journal of scleroderma and related disorders · 2024Article
- The Relationship between Pulmonary Damage and Peripheral Vascular Manifestations in Systemic Sclerosis Patients.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Current international guidelines recommend annual screening for pulmonary arterial hypertension with transthoracic echocardiogram and pulmonary function testing in all patients with scleroderma (systemic sclerosis). Our objectives were to determine Canadian rheumatologists' screening practices for pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with systemic sclerosis and identify reasons why current guideline recommendations may not be followed. Methods: A survey was emailed to all Canadian Rheumatology Association members. They self-identified as systemic sclerosis experts or non-experts and provided basic demographic data. Participants were asked how frequently they screened with transthoracic echocardiogram and pulmonary function testing and, if applicable, why they did not adhere to recommendations. Results: A total of 71 rheumatologists participated, of whom 43 identified as non-experts. Overall, 81.4% ordered annual transthoracic echocardiogram and 77.6% annual pulmonary function testing. Rates of annual transthoracic echocardiogram testing were similar between experts and non-experts, whereas experts ordered annual pulmonary function testing more often. Clinicians with a higher proportion of systemic sclerosis patients in their practice were more likely to follow guidelines. There was an inverse relationship between years in practice and adherence to screening guidelines. The most common reason for not following screening guidelines was disagreement with recommendations, followed by unfamiliarity with guidelines. Conclusions: Pulmonary arterial hypertension screening rates remain sub-optimal in Canada but have improved since 2012. Failure to adopt guidelines is due to rheumatologists disagreeing with or not knowing current recommendations. Future studies should examine why rheumatologists disagree with guidelines and how to improve awareness.
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.