Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Clinical usefulness and patient satisfaction with a musculoskeletal ultrasound clinic: results of a 6-month pilot service in a Rheumatology Unit

  • Imaging
  • Published:
Rheumatology International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is no agreement among the rheumatology community in how to implement the musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) technique in the Rheumatology Divisions. To test the perceived usefulness of the MSUS, under consensus indications, for referring colleagues for the clinical management of their patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and to score the satisfaction level of the patients with different aspects of the ultrasound (US) examination, after attend to the MSUS clinic. A written questionnaire-based survey regarding the usefulness and satisfaction with the implementation of a pilot MSUS clinic in a Rheumatology Unit. Over a 6-month period, 43 patients attended 10 MSUS clinics. Referral agreed indications were: US assisting in early/subclinical diagnosis (35 %), decision making with patient treatment (44 %), monitoring of disease activity/treatment response (39 %) and US-guided injection (11 %). Average scores of the referrers regarding usefulness of the information provided for the US for these indications were 8.0, 8.3, 8.7 and 8.6, respectively, with a high score of 9.0 regarding the valuable support of the US for the management of their patients with IA. Patient satisfaction scores in responders (44 %) were averaged 9.5 and higher for receiving an adequate explanation of the US procedure, indications, US findings and their significance, lack of discomfort and length of the appointment. The average score was slightly lower (8.5) for the waiting time frame for the appointment for the MSUS examination. The referrers expressed a perception of usefulness of our pilot US clinic, under previous consensus indications, for the clinical management of their patients with IA. In addition, this MSUS clinic seemed to show a good acceptability and a high satisfaction scores for the patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Naredo E, D’Agostino MA, Conaghan PG et al (2010) Current state of musculoskeletal ultrasound training and implementation in Europe: results of a survey experts and scientific societies. Rheumatology 49:2438–2443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wakefield RJ, Goh E, Conahan PG et al (2003) Musculoskeletal ultrasonography in Europe: results of a rheumatologist-based survey at a EULAR meeting. Rheumatology 42:1251–1253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Karim Z, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG et al (2001) Impact of ultrasonography on diagnosis and management of patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Arthritis Rheum 44:2932–2933

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Micu CM, Alcalde M, Saez JI et al (2013) Impact of musculoskeletal ultrasound in an outpatient rheumatology clinic. Arthritis Care Res 65:615–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Patil P, Dasgupta B (2012) Role of ultrasound in the assessment of musculoskeletal diseases. Ther Adv Musuloskeletal Dis 4:341–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Koski JM (2000) Ultrasound-guided injections in rheumatology. J Rheumatol 27:2131–2138

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kane D, Balint PW, Sturrock RD (2003) Ultrasonography is superior to clinical examination in the detection and localization of knee joint effusion in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 30:966–971

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Foltz V, Gandjbakhch F, Etchepare F et al (2012) Power Doppler ultrasound, but not low field magnetic resonance imaging predicts relapse and radiographic disease progression in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low levels of disease activity. Arthritis Rheum 64:67–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Naredo E, Collado P, Cruz A et al (2007) Longitudinal Power Doppler ultrasonographic assessment of joint inflammatory activity in early rheumatoid arthritis: predictive value in disease activity and radiologic progression. Arthritis Rheum 57:116–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Colebatch AN, Edwards CJ, Ostergaard M et al (2013) EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging of the joints in the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 72:804–814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Backhaus M, Ohrndorf S, Kellner H et al (2009) Evaluation of a novel 7-joint ultrasound score in daily rheumatologic practice: a pilot project. Arthritis Rheum 61:1194–1201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Iagnocco A, Ceccarelli C, Perricone C et al (2014) The use of musculoskeletal ultrasound in a rheumatology outpatient clinic. Med Ultrason 16:332–335

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rizzo C, Ceccarelli F, Gattamelata A et al (2013) Ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis. Med Ultrason 15:199–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ceponis A, Onishi M, Bluestein HG et al (2014) Utility of the ultrasound examination of the hand and wrist joints in the management of established rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 56:236–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Agrawal S, Bhagat SS, Dasgupta B (2009) Improvement in diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal conditions with one-stop clinic-based ultrasonography. Mod Rheumatol 19:53–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Grassi W (2003) Clinical evaluation versus ultrasonography: who is the winner? J Rheumatol 30:908–909

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Middleton WD, Payne WT, Teefey SA et al (2004) Sonography and MRI of the shoulder: comparison of patient satisfaction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1449–1452

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Professor Leslie for his kind review of this manuscript and Margaret Sutherland for her excellent secretarial assistance with the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Acebes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical standards

As this study was contemplated as a service evaluation, ethics was not required to contact the patients.

Informed consent

Informed consent for decision to participate in the survey was offered to the patients at the beginning of the questionnaire sent after the US clinic.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Acebes, C., Harvie, J.P., Wilson, A. et al. Clinical usefulness and patient satisfaction with a musculoskeletal ultrasound clinic: results of a 6-month pilot service in a Rheumatology Unit. Rheumatol Int 36, 1677–1681 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-016-3538-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-016-3538-8

Keywords

Navigation