Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases logoLink to Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
. 1995 Oct;54(10):850–852. doi: 10.1136/ard.54.10.850

Comparison of clinical and self reported diagnosis for rheumatology outpatients.

I Rasooly 1, A C Papageorgiou 1, E M Badley 1
PMCID: PMC1010023  PMID: 7492227

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To examine the sensitivity of patient self reported diagnoses compared with physician diagnoses in a rheumatology outpatient population. METHODS--A mailed survey to 472 rheumatology outpatients (81% response rate) asked about joint symptoms, disabilities, and underlying rheumatic conditions. The self-reported diagnoses were linked with physician diagnoses in the rheumatology clinic computer based diagnostic registry. RESULT--Overall there was an 87% sensitivity for self reported compared with physician diagnoses when the matching criteria included compatible yet different diagnoses such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA). The sensitivity for exact match was 65%, and it varied with the underlying clinical diagnosis, and was greatest for RA (90%) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) (100%), and intermediate for OA (52%) and psoriatic arthritis (50%). The sensitivity of self report was primarily related to the type of diagnosis (RA or AS v other rheumatic conditions; odds ratio = 16.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.0 to 29.5), and also to difficulty in activities of daily living (odds ratio = 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.6) but not age, gender, duration of disease, or clinic attendance, as shown by multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS--This study in a rheumatology outpatient population indicated that most patients report a diagnosis which is compatible with the clinical diagnosis. These findings give an upper limit to the sensitivity of self reported diagnoses, though further research is needed to assess the extent to which our results may be generalised to other settings.

Full text

PDF
850

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Badley E. M., Tennant A. Changing profile of joint disorders with age: findings from a postal survey of the population of Calderdale, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom. Ann Rheum Dis. 1992 Mar;51(3):366–371. doi: 10.1136/ard.51.3.366. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Badley E. M., Tennant A. Impact of disablement due to rheumatic disorders in a British population: estimates of severity and prevalence from the Calderdale Rheumatic Disablement Survey. Ann Rheum Dis. 1993 Jan;52(1):6–13. doi: 10.1136/ard.52.1.6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Colditz G. A., Martin P., Stampfer M. J., Willett W. C., Sampson L., Rosner B., Hennekens C. H., Speizer F. E. Validation of questionnaire information on risk factors and disease outcomes in a prospective cohort study of women. Am J Epidemiol. 1986 May;123(5):894–900. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ford A. B., Folmar S. J., Salmon R. B., Medalie J. H., Roy A. W., Galazka S. S. Health and function in the old and very old. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1988 Mar;36(3):187–197. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1988.tb01799.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Meltzer J. W., Hochstim J. R. Reliability and validity of survey data on physical health. Public Health Rep. 1970 Dec;85(12):1075–1086. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. O'Toole B. I., Battistutta D., Long A., Crouch K. A comparison of costs and data quality of three health survey methods: mail, telephone and personal home interview. Am J Epidemiol. 1986 Aug;124(2):317–328. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114390. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Paganini-Hill A., Ross R. K. Reliability of recall of drug usage and other health-related information. Am J Epidemiol. 1982 Jul;116(1):114–122. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Reynolds D. L., Chambers L. W., Badley E. M., Bennett K. J., Goldsmith C. H., Jamieson E., Torrance G. W., Tugwell P. Physical disability among Canadians reporting musculoskeletal diseases. J Rheumatol. 1992 Jul;19(7):1020–1030. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Spitz M. R., Fueger J. J., Newell G. R. The development of a comprehensive, institution-based patient risk evaluation program: II. Validity and reliability of questionnaire data. Am J Prev Med. 1988 Jul-Aug;4(4):188–193. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Tretli S., Lund-Larsen P. G., Foss O. P. Reliability of questionnaire information on cardiovascular disease and diabetes: cardiovascular disease study in Finnmark county. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1982 Dec;36(4):269–273. doi: 10.1136/jech.36.4.269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Warren M. D. Interview surveys of handicapped people: the accuracy of statements about the underlying medical conditions. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1976 Nov;15(4):295–302. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/15.4.295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES