Search

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) can be a severe and potentially life-threatening disease that often represents a therapeutic challenge because of its heterogeneous organ manifestations. Only glucocorticoids, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide and very recently belimumab have been approved for SLE therapy in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Dependence on glucocorticoids and resistance to the approved therapeutic agents, as well as substantial toxicity, are frequent. Therefore, treatment considerations will include ‘off-label’ use of medication approved for other indications. In this consensus approach, an effort has been undertaken to delineate the limits of the current evidence on therapeutic options for SLE organ disease, and to agree on common practice. This has been based on the best available evidence obtained by a rigorous literature review and the authors’ own experience with available drugs derived under very similar health care conditions.Preparation of this consensus document included an initial meeting to agree upon the core agenda, a systematic literature review with subsequent formulation of a consensus and determination of the evidence level followed by collecting the level of agreement from the panel members. In addition to overarching principles, the panel have focused on the treatment of major SLE organ manifestations (lupus nephritis, arthritis, lung disease, neuropsychiatric and haematological manifestations, antiphospholipid syndrome and serositis).This consensus report is intended to support clinicians involved in the care of patients with difficult courses of SLE not responding to standard therapies by providing up-to-date information on the best available evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rheumatology in Germany is facing major challenges. The need for rheumatological care is increasing and can no longer be met in some regions for capacity reasons. Too many people with an inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD) have to forego appropriate care or receive it too late. The 4th new edition of the memorandum of the German Society for Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology (DGRh) provides information on rheumatological care in Germany. It was produced under the leadership of the DGRh together with the Professional Association of German Rheumatologists (BDRh), the Association of Acute Rheumatology Clinics (VRA), the German Rheumatism League (DRL) and the German Rheumatism Research Center (DRFZ)., Methods: The memorandum describes the current state and development of the following areas: number of people with IRD, outpatient, inpatient and rehabilitative care structures, number of specialists in rheumatology, education and training, quality of care, health economic aspects and digital care concepts. Proposals for health policy measures to safeguard rheumatological care are presented., Results: Prevalence: approximately 1.8 million adults in Germany have an IRD. The prevalence is increasing, due to changes in the demographic structure of the population, improved diagnostics, treatment and longer survival. Care structures: outpatient specialist care (ASV) for rheumatic diseases is developing as a cross-sectoral care model for hospital outpatient clinics and rheumatology practices. Hospitals have been able to be certified as rheumatology centers since 2020, which enables structural developments. Specialists in rheumatology: as of 31 December 2023, there were 1164 specialists in rheumatology working in Germany. This included 715 physicians accredited to work in practices for national health assurance patients, 39% of whom were employees. In hospitals, 39% of doctors worked part-time. At least 2 rheumatology specialists per 100,000 adults are needed, i.e. around 1400, in order to provide adequate care. This means that there is a shortage of around 700 rheumatology specialists in the outpatient sector alone. Of all working specialists, 30% are currently aged 60 years old and over. Medical training: only 10 out of 38 (26%) state universities have an independent chair in rheumatology. In addition, 11 rheumatology departments are subordinate to a nonrheumatology chair. In the rheumatology-integration into student training (RISA) III study, only 16 out of 36 faculties fulfilled the recommended minimum number of compulsory hours of student rheumatology teaching. Continuing education in rheumatology: the annual postgraduate training qualifications do not cover the demand for rheumatology specialists, which is additionally increasing due to intensified workload, reduced capacities through retirement, and part-time work. Quality of care: since the introduction of highly effective medication patients with IRD have a much better chance of achieving remission of their disease. With early initiation of targeted therapy, the lives of many patients are hardly restricted at all: however, waiting times for a first rheumatological visit often last more than 3 months. Quality target is a first consultation within the first 6 weeks after the onset of symptoms. Models for early consultation, delegation of medical services, structured patient training and digital care concepts have been positively evaluated but are not covered financially., Costs: the total annual costs for inflammatory joint diseases alone amount to around 3 billion euros. The direct costs have significantly risen since the introduction of biologics, while the indirect costs for sick leave, disability and hospitalization have fallen., Conclusion: The core demands of this memorandum are a significant and sustainable increase in the number of further training positions in the outpatient and inpatient sector, the creation of chairs or at least independent departments for rheumatology at all universities and the further implementation of new and cross-sectoral forms of care. This will ensure modern needs-based rheumatological care for all patients in the future., (© 2024. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie und Klinische Immunologie e.V. (DGRh) Published by Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH. All rights reserved.)

Background/objectives: Current data on the care of patients with vasculitis in Germany are scarce. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires can capture aspects of the disease that escape conventional scores for disease activity, remission, and damage. For this reason, the Association of Rheumatological Acute Care Clinics (VRA) initiated a data analysis as part of the KOBRA quality project, the results of which are presented here., Patients and Methods: Patients with vasculitis of vessels of any size or with polymyalgia rheumatica were included. The prospective survey included data on demographics, disease, pain, treatment, follow-up and satisfaction at the time of inpatient admission, discharge and follow-up after 2.5 months. All patients completed the AAV-PRO and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires on admission and follow-up., Results: In this study 420 patients were recruited and follow-up data were available from 302. On average, improvements were documented in all 5 dimensions of the EQ-5D, with the strongest effects in self-care and coping with activities of daily living. In the AAV-PRO, highly significant differences were seen in the domains systemic symptoms and physical functioning. Satisfaction with medical and nursing treatment was very high and did not correlate with pain level or with the AAV-PRO measures., Discussion: Under zreatment patient-reported outcomes improve at least partially in vasculitis patients. Satisfaction with medical treatment quality is independent of these outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

With the Nursing Staff Strengthening Act (Pflegepersonal-Stärkungs-Gesetz), the legislator delegated the specification of the special tasks of centers and focal points to the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA). Due to extensive preliminary work it was already possible to agree on quality requirements and special tasks for rheumatology centers and centers for pediatric and adolescent rheumatology in the first version of the G‑BA regulations. Since publication in the Federal Gazette (Bundesanzeiger) on 12 March 2020, rheumatology centers have been able to negotiate surcharges for their special tasks if they have been designated accordingly by the state authorities responsible for hospital planning. So far, 14 rheumatological centers have been designated. Many patients continue to be treated in healthcare structures that are not specialized in acute inpatient rheumatological care. In addition to the additional remuneration, the designation as a rheumatology center can also contribute to patients becoming even more aware of the healthcare structures that are specialized for them. Acute inpatient rheumatology has several specializations. Some clinics have specialized in the multimodal treatment of chronic rheumatism patients and have gained a high level of expertise in this field. Many of these highly specialized clinics have so far been denied recognition as a center because the regulations of the G‑BA require the provision of further specialist departments at the same location. While for a large number of medical specializations the establishment at a maximum care hospital is likely to make sense, the specialist clinics focusing on the multimodal treatment of chronic rheumatism patients offer the possibility of strengthening rural areas., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Background: The diagnosis of patients with polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) has relied upon the clinical examination of symptoms and laboratory parameters of inflammation until now. Currently, the use of different imaging modalities is being explored, including ultrasound, MRI and PET., Objectives: The aim was to evaluate the diagnostic value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission-tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG-PET/CT) for PMR, in order to improve the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosing PMR and to improve the differential diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Materials and Methods: Examinations using 18F-FDG-PET/CT of 284 rheumatological patients, including 97 patients with PMR, were retrospectively evaluated over a 44-month period. Furthermore, 13 regions changed by inflammation were analysed via a three-dimensional region of interest (ROI) measurement with determination of maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax), followed by statistical analyses., Results and Discussion: Patients with PMR presented significantly elevated uptake in all regions examined (p < 0.001), compared with a control group treated for rheumatological diseases. The method with the highest diagnostic relevance was represented by the combination of four SUVmax values of both anterolateral hip capsules and both ischial tuberosities, reaching a sensitivity of 91.3% and a specificity of 97.6% with a cut-off of 11.0 SUV at the initial diagnosis of PMR patients who had not yet received any immunosuppressive therapy. Patients with RA could be significantly distinguished from those with PMR at initial diagnosis in the same anatomical regions (p < 0.001)., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Quality standards (QS) are measurable constructs designed to quantify gaps in care and subsequently to improve quality of care. The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) recently generated and published international QS for the management of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) for the first time. The German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) then decided to translate, review and possibly adopt these standards by a group of experts from different care settings. Against this background, national QS for the management of patients with axSpA for Germany were developed for the first time. The main focus was on feasibility and practical relevance. Ultimately, nine QS were defined with which the quality of care in Germany can and should be measured and improved., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Despite a qualitatively and structurally good care of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Germany, there are still potentially amendable deficits in the quality of care. For this reason, the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) has therefore decided to ask a group of experts including various stakeholders to develop quality standards (QS) for the care of patients with RA in order to improve the quality of care. The QS are used to determine and quantitatively measure the quality of care, subject to relevance and feasibility. The recently published NICE and ASAS standards and a systematic literature search were used as the basis for development. A total of 8 QS, now published for the first time, were approved with the intention to measure and further optimize the quality of care for patients with RA in Germany., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

To review and be prepared for upcoming reforms, data from the InEK (Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus, institute for remuneration in hospitals) data browser and the structured quality reports for inpatient rheumatologic treatment were evaluated. Rheumatologic treatment is very diversified, both in terms of diagnoses and structures. Different specializations can be identified. Rheumatologic complex treatment (RCT) is just one of these and is performed on average in just over 10% of cases. In 2020, cases for selected rheumatological diagnoses decreased by more than 20% compared to 2019. For RCT, the decline was even more pronounced with more than 30%. Evidence of higher disease severity could not be found in the available data. It remains to be seen whether the pre-Corona caseload will be regained in the coming years. In all, 146 organizational departments with more than 20 principal diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were identified in 2019. Forty-seven (32%) of these coded RCT more than ten times, and 29 (20%) more than one hundred times. All 23 departments with more than 300 principle diagnoses of RA are members of the Association of Rheumatological Acute Care Hospitals (Verband rheumatologischer Akutkliniken, VRA), 15 of which participated in the KOBRA quality project and carry the VRA seal of approval. Of the 116 internal medicine departments, only 55 (47%) use a specific specialty code for a rheumatology department according to Article 301 SGB V (social insurance code). Information on specialist staffing was partly contradictory. How many cases with inflammatory rheumatic diseases are treated in specialized departments cannot be answered with the available data. Nevertheless, the available data can be used for specialist, structural, and organizational developments in acute inpatient rheumatology., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

The publicity campaign "rheuma2025", initiated by the Union for Rheumatology, aims at improvement of patient-centered care. For this the number of positions for trainees in rheumatology needs to increase to a level which matches the public needs. Students in medical school must have even more interest for the discipline and they must be recruited. Regulatory constraints in the approval by the authorities for opening a private rheumatology practice must become much more flexible. The possibilities for in-patient acute care of patients in specialized hospitals have to be strengthened. Finally, the public image of rheumatology per se must be sharpened. To achieve these goals a homepage for the campaign was created ( https://rheuma2025.de ), which provides a toolkit of items for the public, for physicians and students. Various media channels for rheuma2025 were established with specific contents for each target group., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Background: In some areas of Germany, there is a shortage of specialist physicians for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Delegating certain medical care services to qualified, specialized rheumatological assistants (SRAs) might be an effective way to supplement the available capacity for specialized medical care., Methods: Patients under stable treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) were included in this trial, which was designed to demonstrate, in a first step, the non-inferiority of a form of care involving delegation of physicians' tasks to SRAs (team-based care), in comparison to standard care, with respect to changes in disease activity at one year. "Non-inferiority," in this context, means either superiority or else an irrelevant extent of inferiority. In a second step, in case non-inferiority could be shown, the superiority of team-based care with respect to changes in patients' health-related quality of life would be tested as well. Disease activity was measured with the Disease Activity Score 28, and health-related quality of life with the EQ-5D-5L. This was a randomized, multicenter, rater-blinded trial with two treatment arms (team-based care and standard care). The statistical analysis was performed with mixed linear models (DRKS00015526)., Results: From September 2018 to June 2019, 601 patients from 14 rheumatological practices and 3 outpatient rheumatological clinics in the German states of North Rhine-Westphalia and Lower Saxony were randomized to either team-based or standard care. Team-based care was found to be non-inferior to standard care with respect to changes in disease activity (adjusted difference = -0.19; 95% confidence interval [-0.36; -0.02]; p <0.001 for non-inferiority). Superiority with respect to health-related quality of life was not demonstrated (adjusted difference = 0.02 [-0.02; 0.05], p = 0.285)., Conclusion: Team-based care, with greater integration of SRAs, is just as good as standard care in important respects. Trained SRAs can effectively support rheumatologists in the care of stable patients with RA or PsA.

A comprehensive health policy quality campaign launched in 2021 aims to improve the quality and transparency of hospital care for people with diseases in Germany. Legal requirements for minimum volumes and the expansion of quality contracts between cost units and hospitals as well as the use of quality indicators relevant to planning for demand-oriented and quality-oriented further development of inpatient care will increase competition in the quality of care between hospitals. The topic of development and definition of quality in medicine was also comprehensively addressed by the Association of Rheumatological Acute Care Clinics (VRA) shortly after its foundation in 1998. At the center of acute inpatient quality management are binding structural criteria linked to the continuous outcome benchmarking in acute rheumatology care (KOBRA) project launched in 2003 in rheumatology (and continuously implemented to date) measuring process and outcome quality. Based on this framework (fulfillment of the structural quality and participation in the KOBRA project) successfully participating rheumatology units can acquire the KOBRA seal of approval for 2 years at a time, which is awarded by the project management, the aQua Institute. The outstanding position of the project is exemplified by data evaluation on treatment change in active rheumatoid arthritis, diagnosis confirmation of connective tissue diseases and vasculitis during the inpatient stay as well as on participatory decision-making processes concerning rheumatoid arthritis (referring to the results of the data collection period 2018). By anchoring projects for structural, process and outcome quality acute inpatient rheumatology is well prepared for the paradigm shift demanded by health policies. Additionally, the KOBRA project is a good prerequisite to meet the requirements concerning quality management fixed in the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) guidelines for recognition as a rheumatology center., (© 2021. Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

In September 2019 the Ministry of Labor, Health and Welfare (MAGS) of North-Rhine/Westphalia (NRW) published an expert report on hospital planning. In this report a fundamental reform of hospital planning was recommended, in that a requirements planning should be carried out in the future on the basis of a detailed designation of disciplines and organizational groups. At the request of the MAGS NRW, the German Society for Rheumatology (DGRh) with the support of the Association of Rheumatological Acute Clinics (VRA) has also commented on this issue.

Background: A new conceptual framework has enabled the flexible development of rheumatological patient educational programs for different healthcare settings. On this basis, a 5‑h basic training program for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was developed to be used in specialized centers. Rheumatologists and psychologists were first trained and then the efficacy of the patient training program was evaluated based on the causal model of patient education., Methods: The externally randomized waiting control group study with 249 RA patients included 3 measurement points. The impact of the 5‑h basic training on disease and treatment-related knowledge as well as health competence of RA patients was examined. Secondary questions included attitudinal parameters, communication competence, effects on the disease and satisfaction with the educational program. Data were analyzed on an intention to treat basis by means of covariance analyses for the main target variables, adjusted for baseline values., Results: The analyses showed that the training program was effective. Even 3 months after training, participants reported more knowledge and health competence than the waiting control group, with small to medium-sized effects (d = 0.37 and 0.38, respectively). With the exception of disease communication, no other effects of training were observed in the secondary objectives., Conclusion: The basic training program provides a good foundation to develop further interventions to improve attitudinal and disease parameters. It can serve as a central component for rheumatological healthcare for patients with RA at various levels.

Background: Autoimmune adverse events are the most relevant risks of alemtuzumab therapy. We present a patient with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, who developed adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD) following alemtuzumab treatment., Case Presentation: The patient suffered from sore throat, swallowing difficulties, high spiking quotidian fever, generalized skin rash, arthritis, and myalgia 2 months after the second course of alemtuzumab. Laboratory tests revealed elevated acute-phase reactants, anemia, neutrophilic leukocytosis, and thrombocytosis. Serum calprotectin, interleukin-2, and interleukin-6 levels were strongly increased. Autoimmune, rheumatic, neoplastic, infectious, and granulomatous disorders were excluded. The NLRP1 and NLRP3 gene test, which was performed under the presumption of a cryopyrin-associated autoinflammatory syndrome, was negative. Based on the Yamaguchi and Fautrel criteria, and supported by the histological findings from a skin biopsy of the rash, the diagnosis of AOSD was established. Therapy with the anti-IL-1 agent (anakinra) led to a significant improvement of symptoms and blood parameters. However, anakinra had to be converted to rituximab due to generalized drug eruption. Following therapy with rituximab, the patient has fully recovered., Conclusion: The current case highlights AOSD as another rare and potentially life-threatening secondary autoinflammatory/autoimmune event following alemtuzumab treatment., (Copyright © 2020 Krämer, Krömer-Olbrisch, Lakomek, Schellinger, Foell, Meuth and Straeten.)

In two research projects, rheumatological patient education programmes were updated. The first step was to develop an expert consented framework for all rheumatological patient education programmes. From this, curricula and working materials for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and axial spondyloarthritis (AS) were derived and two exemplary patient education manuals developed. A randomized controlled trail was designed for the five-hour RA basic education program. Finally, existing train-the-trainer training courses were adapted for these patient education programmes.

Since April 2018, the new third level care model of outpatient specialist care (ASV) according to §116b of the Social Code Book V (SGBV) has been available for patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases in Germany. Not only is a multiprofessional cooperation between the disciplines involved in treating rheumatic diseases promoted but also the cooperation between specialized rheumatologists and other specialists in private practice and in hospitals is encouraged. As budget capping limiting services and number of cases do not apply in ASV, a significant improvement of patient care in rheumatology is expected due to an increase in provider capacity. At the end of May 2019, 72 rheumatologists in the first 9 newly approved ASV teams had qualified for this new care concept. Bureaucratic obstacles have so far delayed the implementation of ASV. Difficulties arose in building a team with different specialties, in the process of registration of the teams and the assessment of the registration by certain regional boards responsible for access control. The national associations of rheumatologists, the Professional Association of German Rheumatologists (BDRh), the VRA (Verband der Rheumatologischen Akutkliniken e. V.) and the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) campaign for an easier admission of providers to the ASV and for adequate financing of all specialties involved in the ASV. The aim is to realize the chance of the ASV for better rheumatological care nationwide with shorter waiting times for a medical appointment and a better cooperation between specialists.

Due to medical advances and the availability of efficient immunosuppressive therapies, the life-expectancy of people suffering from inflammatory rheumatic diseases is continuously increasing. In Germany, geriatric patients (definition: age older than 70 years combined with geriatric multimorbidity) affected, e. g. by rheumatoid arthritis (RA) frequently receive corticosteroids and less often biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs), which is justified by additionally existing comorbidities and polypharmacy. Using geriatric typical assessments as well as detailed medication regimens the treatment risk of bDMARD and cDMARD administration can be properly evaluated. Current data on biological therapy in older patients with rheumatism support this recommendation. Following the "choosing wisely" initiative of the German Association of Internal Medicine the authors listed 5 positive and 5 negative recommendations concerning the pharmacotherapy of older patients suffering from rheumatism (e. g. RA) as practical guidance towards safer bDMARD and cDMARD treatment for geriatric RA patients.

With the introduction of the German diagnostic-related groups (G-DRG) system in 2003, remuneration according to DRG was also implemented for the disciplines of rheumatology and geriatrics. For acute inpatient treatment in the field of rheumatology the specialized complex rheumatological treatment (OPS code 8-983) and the related DRG-I97Z (rheumatological complex treatment for diseases and disorders of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue) were assigned to the DRG system in 2005 and 2006, respectively. The early complex geriatric rehabilitation (OPS code 8-550) is a tool in the treatment of older patients affected by rheumatism. In this article the challenges of realizing complex therapies are described using the examples of OPS code 8-983 and 8-550 and their structural and procedural differences are outlined. Acute inpatient treatment of patients severely affected by a rheumatic disease as well as of multimorbid geriatric patients with rheumatism is supported by the implementation of the respective complex therapy.

On behalf of the Steering Committee of the German Society for Rheumatology, in 2016 the Interdisciplinary Commission on Healthcare Quality updated the 2008 memorandum on rheumatological healthcare in Germany. The update considers changes in therapeutic strategies, treatment targets as well as current structures in healthcare and the political framework. It concentrates on examination of the need for rheumatologists with a background in internal medicine and determines the gap between needs and supply. The internist rheumatologist is responsible for the care of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and contributes to the care of patients with severe forms of other musculoskeletal diseases. At least 2 internist rheumatologists are needed for the outpatient care of 100,000 adult inhabitants, equivalent to 1350 rheumatologists in Germany. With currently 776 rheumatologists, we have little more than half of what we need. The German Society for Rheumatology calls for specific requirements planning for rheumatologists in outpatient care in order to decrease the deficit. In acute inpatient care we need specialized hospitals and wards that ensure a high quality of treatment for patients with complex diseases. We need up to 50 beds per 1 million inhabitants. At least 2 full-time internist rheumatologists and 3 further physicians are needed per 30 beds. In inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation we need 40 beds or outpatient places per 1 million inhabitants with at least 1 full-time rheumatologist and 1 further physician. In order to reduce the existing deficits and to cover the increasing future need for rheumatologists, more emphasis has to be laid on primary and secondary education. Chairs for internal rheumatology are needed at each medical university and more positions for postgraduate training in rheumatology should be provided. In all segments of healthcare the treatment aims should be jointly defined between patients and physicians. The patients should be treated in an interdisciplinary network, comprising other medical specialties, health professionals as well as patient organizations.

Quality measurement of medical care has become increasingly important in Germany in recent years. Essentially, three areas can be distinguished: the quality of structure, process and outcome. For the measurement of quality, quality indicators are necessary. The Federal Joint Committee has recently been responsible for defining such quality indicators. Because proposals for quality indicators for the indication for rheumatoid arthritis in have already been published in international rheumatology, we selected and translated the three most important European publications in order to present them to the rheumatology community. The ultimate aim is the initiation of a process for the joint development of quality indicators within the professional association and the two associations in Germany in order to then be able to adequately discuss these with policy-makers.

Hospital financing 2016 will be influenced by the prospects of the approaching considerable changes. It is assumed that the following years will lead to a considerable reallocation of financial resources between hospitals. While not directly targeted by new regulations, reallocations always also affect specialties like rheumatology. Compared to the alterations in the legislative framework the financial effects of the yearly adaptation of the German diagnosis-related groups system are subordinate. Only by comprehensive consideration of current and expected changes a forward-looking and sustainable strategy can be developed. The following article presents the relevant changes and discusses the consequences for hospitals specialized in rheumatology.

The recently passed German hospital structure act (Krankenhausstrukturgesetz) stresses the immense importance of quality for the medical care of the population. How can inpatient and outpatient treatment in the field of rheumatology be improved and how can this be assessed? A very important basis for such measurement approaches are quality indicators, i.e. parameters that indicate to what degree a certain level of quality has already been reached or is planned to be reached in the future. The work performed by the German Rheumatism Research Center (DRFZ) and the Association of Rheumatological Acute Clinics (VRA) in Germany has already used certain quality indicators and this topic has been recently described elsewhere. International quality indicators have also been published in recent years, all for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the most prevalent inflammatory rheumatic disease and are the central subject of this article. This overview of proposed instruments for quality assessment in rheumatology is intended to initiate a broad discussion on the subject of quality of rheumatological care in Germany.

In the current draft of the law on the reform of the support structures of hospital provision (German Hospital Structure Law) the future quality of provision is highly significant. Quality assurance measures are mandatory for hospitals. The Federal General Committee was legally charged with developing the relevant quality indicators for structural, procedural and outcome quality that are designed to form the criteria and the basis for planning decisions in the federal states. This involves a paradigm shift in quality assurance measures in hospitals. In the future, subject to the verified quality, this should have an influence on hospital planning, and the funding or regulation of hospital departments should also adhere to this prescribed quality. This review reveals the course of quality or quality assurance measures in medical services in Germany. The status of the institutions responsible for the quality of care in hospitals and the significance of quality indicators are explained.

The announced major reforms will most probably not have an impact on hospital financing before 2016. Nevertheless, the numerous minor changes in the legislative framework and the new version of the German diagnosis-related groups (G-DRG) system can be important for hospitals specialized in rheumatology. The following article presents the relevant changes and discusses the consequences for hospitals specialized in rheumatology.

As with others medical disciplines hospitals specialized in rheumatology again face heavy economic burdens in 2014. To meet the challenges knowledge of the new German diagnosis-related groups (G-DRG) system, the legislative framework and current jurisprudence can be helpful. The following article presents the major changes and discusses the consequences for hospitals specialized in rheumatology.

An appropriate treatment of elderly rheumatic patients implements comprehensive diagnostics and exclusion diagnostics of e.g. coronary heart disease, osteoporosis, renal failure, diabetes mellitus type 2 and thyroid gland dysfunction. Furthermore, the complex disease situation might require the integration of other faculties or might be a reason for inpatient treatment. The complexity in the treatment of multimorbid elderly patients suffering from rheumatism not only rises with increasing age but also constitutes a considerable challenge due to existing incapacities and preceding as well as currently performed immunosuppressive therapies. The necessary treatment framework is outlined from the perspective of rheumatologists and geriatricians. Typical geriatric symptoms, such as malnutrition, immobility and frailty might be enhanced if multimorbidity is simultaneously present.

While diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases and osteoporosis in the elderly are categorized as comorbidities of rheumatoid arthritis, elderly rheumatic patients are often additionally affected by thyroid dysfunctions and diabetes mellitus type 2, so that the risk of multimorbidity (coexistence of at least two chronic and/or acute diseases) will increase significantly in elderly patients already suffering from systemic rheumatic diseases. Restricted cognition, adherence or compliance may additionally complicate the treatment of elderly rheumatic patients. Furthermore, the pharmacokinetics of the elderly is another challenging task. Referring to selected aspects of geriatric pharmacotherapy, the use of certain substance classes is described in this context.

Hospital financing is again subjected to a multitude of reforms that can be of relevance for rheumatology in 2013. Besides changes in the German diagnosis-related group (G-DRG) classification system and coding, modifications in the legislation and legal framework conditions have a growing impact on the economic situation and strategy of hospitals. The following article presents the major changes and discusses consequences for hospitals specialized in rheumatology.

The following article presents the major general and specific changes for the financing of rheumatology in Germany for 2012. Besides relevant changes in the German diagnosis-related groups (G-DRG) classification system and for the coding, the new legislation and the resulting incentives are covered. The consequences for hospitals specialized in rheumatology are discussed.

Due to the general lack of physicians in German hospitals new approaches are necessary to be successful in acquiring doctors for training in inpatient rheumatology.Although the financing of rheumatology education is still included in the general payment of hospitals, currently the diagnoses-related groups,,as it has already been fixed in the regulation on hospital care rates in Germany since 1994, new strategies may help to improve the financial situation of hospital units.The implementation of a binding structural quality, endorsed by the Association of Rheumatology Clinics in Germany (VRA), as well as the application of clinical pathways will optimize revenues.Further financial improvements can result from the implementation of case management, the implementation of interdisciplinary treatment, the promotion of a high quality treatment, from a differentiated approach towards outpatient treatment and a specialization within inpatient rheumatology units.Incorporating these strategies the advantages may not only affect the financial situation of hospitals but may also offer valuable incentives for physicians to start their professional career in inpatient rheumatology.

Publication of the treat-to-target (T2T) concept at the end of the Bone and Joint Decade almost coincided with the 15 treatment recommendations of the EULAR as well as with the new classification and revised remission criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).The treat-to-target initiative is solely focused on the description of benchmarks for an effective treatment management of RA to reach its priority target of remission.From the perspective of inpatient rheumatology parallels are shown to the quality projects of the Association of Rheumatology Clinics (VRA), which were initiated in 2001 for the first time.The quality management started up by the VRA not only benefited from the development of the German diagnosis-related groups (G-DRG) system which was also supported by the VRA and the German Society of Rheumatology (DGRh) but also from projects realized to improve the structural and operational quality in inpatient rheumatology units.By launching its own outcome benchmarking project (OBRA) in 2003, which was financially supported by the German Ministry of Health and its continuation with Kobra-1 and future Kobra-2, the VRA already successfully incorporated all benchmarks of management guidelines outlined in the T2T initiative.By steadily improving the outcome, even of RA patients, inpatient rheumatology offers a special quality project for participating clinics who are otherwise competitors, not only to learn from each other but to support each other to find the best way (T2T) to reach a remission and a good quality of life for RA patients and patients with other systemic rheumatic diseases.

In 2010 a total of 9 guidelines on structural quality were endorsed by the Association of Rheumatology Clinics in Germany (VRA). These 9 structural criteria replace the regulations published in 2002 and were elaborated with the support of the German Rheumatology League. With guideline number 9 even the structural requirements for university hospitals are defined for the first time.Along with taking part in the quality project "Kobra" (continuous outcome benchmarking in rheumatology inpatient treatment) compliance with the new structural criteria constitutes a prerequisite for acquiring a quality certificate, which is awarded by an external institution.By this means the VRA sets the stage for its members to be prepared for future challenges and quality competition among hospitals. Furthermore, the provision of a high quality treatment for chronically diseased patients in rheumatology clinics will be effectively supported.

Objective: Localization of microadenomas in Cushing's disease may be difficult as in up to 45% of patients sellar MRI fails to detect a pituitary tumor. Intraoperative transsphenoidal ultrasound may identify microadenomas as hyperechoic structures. We report on the first 18 consecutive cases with intraoperative use of a new device for direct contact high-frequency-ultrasound in patients with Cushing's disease., Patients and Technique: 18 patients (14 female, 4 male, age 24-71 years) with typical endocrinological findings for Cushing's disease were included in the study. One macroadenoma and 13 microadenomas were suspected or identified preoperatively by MRI. In 4 cases, two of them with recurrent disease, sellar MRIs were negative. During transsphenoidal microsurgery an end fire ultrasound-probe (B-mode frequency range 7.5-13 Mhz, field of view 5 mm, penetration 20 mm) was introduced after opening of sellar floor. The pituitary gland was scanned in direct contact to the capsule., Results: In 13 out of 17 cases (77%) with later on proven microadenomas high-frequency-ultrasound identified the tumors as hyperechoic masses, including 3 of the 4 cases with negative preoperative MRI. In 2 cases ultrasound correctly localized the tumor at a site different from MRI finding (MRI false positive). In the macroadenoma, identification of the border between tumor and anterior pituitary gland was not possible. In all 18 patients postoperative early decline of serum cortisol to subnormal levels confirmed remission of hypercortisolism (100%). Other pituitary functions were unaltered in 17 cases (94%)., Conclusions: Intraoperative scanning of the pituitary gland with high-frequency-ultrasound probes may identify intrapituitary anatomy and pathologies even in MRI-negative cases. This may prevent extensive exploration of the gland with the risk of subsequent hypopituitarism., (© J. A. Barth Verlag in Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

The following article presents the major general and specific changes for rheumatology in the financing of inpatient care in Germany for 2011. In addition to relevant changes in the G-DRG classification system and coding, the new legislation and insurance company auditing procedures are covered. The impact these changes will have on hospitals specialized in rheumatology is discussed.

By initiating and taking part in the pilot project obra (outcome benchmarking in rheumatologic acute care), which was supported by the German Ministry of Health, the rheumatologic hospitals committed themselves to the continuous improvement of quality through a collective benchmarking and learning process. In addition to verifiable and concrete improvements in quality, the major achievements of the obra pilot project include a cultural change in the participating hospitals as well as the continuation of outcome benchmarking and its expansion to an increasing number of hospitals., (Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier GmbH.)

The following article presents the major general and specific changes in the G-DRG system, in the classification systems for diagnoses and procedures as well as for the billing process for 2010. Since the G-DRG system is primarily a tool for the redistribution of resources, every hospital needs to analyze the economic effects of the changes by applying the G-DRG transition-grouper to its own cases. Depending on their clinical focus, rheumatological departments may experience positive or negative consequences from the adjustments. In addition, relevant current case law is considered.

The following article presents the main general and specific changes in the G-DRG (German diagnosis-related groups) system in terms of the classification systems for diagnoses and procedures as well as the billing process for 2009. Of fundamental relevance is the national weighting of the G-DRG I97Z (complex rheumatologic treatment), which up to now had to be negotiated individually by each hospital. Emphasis is also put on case auditing by the health insurers. Being primarily a tool for redistribution of resources, every hospital has to analyze the economic effects of the 2009 G-DRG system by applying the G-DRG transition grouper to its own cases. Depending on their clinical focus rheumatological departments may experience positive or negative consequences from the development. The strain imposed on hospitals by inadequate refunding of rising costs has to be assessed separately from the effects of redistribution by the G-DRG system.

The G-DRG system 2008 once again brings many changes to rheumatological departments in Germany. The following article presents the main general and specific changes in the G-DRG system, as well as in the classification systems for diagnoses and procedures and in invoicing for 2008. Since the G-DRG system is only a tool for the redistribution of resources, every hospital needs to analyze the economic effects of the system by applying the G-DRG transition grouper to its own cases. Depending on their clinical focus, rheumatological departments may experience positive or negative effects from the system's application. The strain placed on hospitals by the inadequate funding of increased costs needs to be assessed separately from the effects of redistribution by the G-DRG system.