Use of a validated screening tool for psoriatic arthritis in dermatology clinics. Issue 1 (10th February 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ganatra, Bella; Manoharan, Dishan; Akhras, Victoria
• Is Part Of: BMJ open quality. Volume 4:Issue 1(2015)
• Publication Date: 2015-02-10
• Subjects: Medical care -- Quality control -- Periodicals; 362.106805
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjquality.u203335.w2644
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2399-6641

Abstract

Abstract: Dermatology clinics represent a key opportunity to screen patients with psoriasis for psoriatic arthritis (PA) which often remains unrecognised. A significant proportion of adults with psoriasis develop arthropathy [5] with around two-thirds having progressive arthritis.[6] NICE has recognised this by the annual use of a validated screening tool such as psoriasis epidemiological screening tool (PEST) on all psoriasis patients without PA. We introduced the PEST into our dermatology department since there was no established system of screening for PA. Twenty-one percent of patients that were identified through PEST as requiring a referral at baseline were not referred to rheumatology through the current system without PEST. This represented a significantly missed proportion of patients with possible PA. Using the PDSA cycle method, we introduced the PEST into cycle 1 and educated key staff about the tool. All eligible patients were referred appropriately. Through doctor and patient feedback, changes were adopted for cycle 2 and informative emails to all key staff about PEST were sent. We noted a drop in the number of PEST uptake in this cycle possibly due to lack of awareness on the purpose and use of PEST among staff, across the department. An educational teaching session was delivered to a wider audience and posters were placed in strategic areas of the department prior to the final cycle. This resulted in 100% PEST uptake and 100% of those with a score of >3 being referred. A total of 51 patients were studied, comprising of 30 eligible patients for PEST. Of these, 27 patients were actually screened (90%) and five with a PEST score of ≥ 3 were identified and referred appropriately (18.5%). We felt this represented a successful outcome in increasing PEST uptake within the department and in capturing a significant proportion of patients at risk of PA.