ArticleCureus2022
A Survey of Diagnostic Delay in Axial Spondyloarthritis Across Two National Health Service (NHS) Rheumatology Services.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- How do general practitioners diagnose and refer potential rheumatic musculoskeletal complaints? A scoping review.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- First Contact Physiotherapists (FCPs) Referral Practices to Rheumatology: A Scoping Review of the Evidence Base.Musculoskeletal care · 2026Article
- What is the economic burden of delayed axial spondyloarthritis diagnosis in the UK?Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Delayed diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis: the crucial role of primary care - how you can make a difference.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Trajectories of physical, mental health and health satisfaction before and after arthritis diagnosis: a UK population-based study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- First contact physiotherapists: are they able to reduce the burden on rheumatology services? A critical review of the evidence base.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Diagnostic delay is an ongoing challenge in axial spondyloarthritis (axial SpA). A recent, comprehensive literature review has found a mean average of 8.7 years of delay between symptom onset and formal diagnosis in the United Kingdom (UK). The primary aim of this study was to identify delays to diagnosis experienced by patients with axial SpA under the ongoing care of two urban National Health Service (NHS) rheumatology services. The secondary aims were (a) to count healthcare professional (HCP) interactions after symptom onset but prior to the diagnosis, (b) to compare our data to published delay to diagnosis research and (c) to explore contributing factors locally and the variation between the two UK rheumatology services. Methods A 14-question survey was created to identify the delay to diagnosis and contributing factors across two urban NHS axial SpA services, from the onset of symptoms to diagnosis and commencement of treatment. Participants were recruited from clinic visits between August and November 2021 and completed the survey either on paper or via online survey software, both with HCP support. Results Those completing the survey formed a cohort of 106 participants with an established diagnosis of axial SpA who attended the axial SpA services at either Royal Free NHS Foundation Trust or Salford Care Organisation, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust. The mean time from the onset of symptoms to the diagnosis of axial SpA was similar across centres despite the differences in demographics, with Royal Free at 5.72 years and Salford Royal at 5.96 years. When reviewing via median diagnostic delay, there was a notable difference with Royal Free at 6.09 years and Salford Royal at 4.27 years. Across the two sites, between the onset of symptoms and the diagnosis of axial SpA, 90% of the participants saw a general practitioner (GP), of which 63% of the patients saw a GP 1-5 times, 23% saw 5-10 times and 14% saw more than 10 times. Many participants also saw other HCPs, including physiotherapists, other manual therapists and hospital specialists prior to diagnosis. In addition, 32% saw one other HCP, 18% two other HCPs, 9% three, 7% four and 2.7% five other HCPs prior to diagnosis. Close to 80% of the patients stated that they had received adequate axial SpA education at diagnosis, and 76% of the patients were aware of who to contact in the event of a flare. Conclusions These data highlight that the mean average time to diagnosis for both trusts was between five and six years, somewhat lower than the 8.7-year national UK average. However, despite being specialist centres, these data are a long way from the National Axial Spondyloarthritis Society (NASS) "Gold Standard" of one year time to diagnosis. The contributors to this include lack of HCP and community awareness about axial SpA, its recognition and appropriate onwards referral. There is a need for concerted ways of working for the development of patient pathways and public and HCP education to reduce this delay to allow the ambitious NASS Gold Standard of one year time to diagnosis to be achieved.
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.