Search

Background/Purpose: Access to pediatric rheumatology (PR) care is limited. An average of 28 fellows graduate from PR training programs annually, and there are 224 board-certified pediatric rheumatologists in the United States. Eleven states have no pediatric rheumatologist and 24 states have two or fewer. Furthermore, the mean distance to a certified pediatric rheumatologist is 60 miles. The impact that limited access to PR has on general pediatricians has not been studied. Methods: A web-based survey was emailed to general pediatricians practicing in Minnesota (MN), North Dakota (ND), and South Dakota (SD). The email databases were obtained from the MN and ND state medical licensing boards and from the SD chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The goal of the survey was to define barriers to access to PR care and the consequences of limited access. Basic descriptive analysis was performed and responses were summarized. Results: The overall response rate was 15.3% (93/609). Responders were younger than non-responders (mean age 48 yo versus 53 yo, p = 0.0006) and had been in practice a shorter period of time (mean 22 y versus 27 y, p = 0.0051). Forty percent (37/92) of the clinics were urban, 40% (37/92) suburban, and 20% (18/92) rural. Twenty-nine percent (27/92) of respondents' clinics were at least two hours by car from a pediatric rheumatologist, and 9% (8/92) were more than 6 hours away. Ninety-two percent (85/92) had referred a patient to PR at least once, but 89% (83/93) had experienced a situation at least once in which they considered a referral to PR but ultimately did not. Reasons for not referring varied. When asked, “In cases in which you considered a PR referral but did not refer a patient to a pediatric rheumatologist, please indicate your reasons for doing so. (Select all that apply),” many had referred to other subspecialists instead: 29% (24/83) to pediatric infectious disease, 20% (17/83) to adult rheumatology, and 12% (10/83) to pediatric orthopedics, while 34% (28/83) managed the patient themselves. Although not a pre-specified choice in the survey, 9% (3/32) of pediatricians added wait-time as the reason for not referring to PR. Thirty-five percent (32/60) had referred a pediatric patient to an adult rheumatologist, most commonly for distance (47%), while physician preference was never selected as a reason. Conclusion: Pediatricians often refer children with possible rheumatic disease to specialists other than PR due to reasons of distance and wait-time. Referral to adult rheumatologists occurs, but not based on pediatrician preference. These findings suggest that the PR workforce is inadequate to meet demand, at least in the Upper Midwest. Interventions are needed to improve access to care in PR.

Background/Purpose: Rheumatology lab tests are often of low diagnostic utility when ordered by primary care physicians, and may lead to erroneous referrals. No prior studies have investigated pediatricians' reasons for ordering these tests. We surveyed pediatricians in three states of the Upper Midwest regarding their ordering of rheumatology lab tests and reasons for referral to pediatric rheumatology (PR). Methods: A web-based survey was emailed to general pediatricians practicing in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The rheumatology tests queried included antinuclear antibody (ANA), anti-double-stranded DNA antibody (anti-dsDNA), rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (anti-CCP), and HLA-B27. Basic descriptive analysis was performed. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess the relationship between the pediatrician's experience with PR (defined as years since completion of residency training, whether or not the training program had a PR division, time spent in a PR clinic during training and completion of continued medical education focused on PR in the last three years) and the appropriateness of lab tests and PR referrals. Results: The response rate was 15.3% (93/609). Eighty-nine percent (83/93) of the respondents had ordered ANA, for reasons including abnormal joint exam (72%), musculoskeletal (MSK) pain with a normal exam (52%), concern for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) (47%), rash (41%), concern for systemic lupus erythematosus (39%), fatigue (35%), and fever (35%). Fifty-nine percent (54/92) had ordered anti-dsDNA, and the distribution of reasons paralleled that of ANA. Seventy-three percent (67/92) had ever ordered RF, most commonly for abnormal joint exam (67%), joint pain with a normal exam (60%), concern for JIA (42%), and fever (30%). Only 8% (7/92) had ordered anti-CCP. Forty-two percent (39/92) had ordered HLA-B27, primarily for back pain (59%). Of those who had ever referred a patient to a pediatric rheumatologist, 44% (37/85) did so for a positive ANA of unclear significance, 14% (12/85) for positive RF of unclear significance, and 9% (8/85) for anti-dsDNA of unclear significance. Positive HLA-B27 and anti-CCP were less common referral reasons. Subgroup analysis did not show significant differences between experience level and appropriateness of lab tests and referrals to PR. Conclusion: Inappropriate ordering of rheumatology lab tests with subsequent referral to PR is common among pediatricians in the Upper Midwest and likely elsewhere. The correctness of lab test utilization and referral to PR did not obviously improve with increased experience in PR. New educational interventions are needed to improve general pediatricians' understanding and utilization of rheumatology lab tests and to decrease unnecessary referrals to PR.