Skip to main content
. 2019 Sep 6;21(10):57. doi: 10.1007/s11926-019-0855-4

Table 1.

Evaluated transitional care programmes in rheumatology reported in peer-reviewed journals since 2015

Reference Programme Country Setting Diseases Age at enrolment (years) Designated transition staff Transition readiness assessment Programme components Shared care Age of transfer Evaluation Results
Jensen et al. (2015) [36] Social worker–centred paediatric rheumatology transition program USA Paediatric rheumatology clinic Any RMD requiring transfer to adult rheumatology Median 18 (15–26) Social worker

Rheumatology-specific workbook including self-reflective questions

Written transition goals reviewed at clinic visits

Face-to-face meetings with social worker at clinic visits and interim phone calls; facilitation of the adult appointment; phone call follow-up 6–8 months post transfer No When paediatric rheumatologists deemed appropriate

Satisfaction questionnaire

Attendance at adult rheumatology clinic

Compared with the control group who had not participated in the programme

81% satisfied

42% successful transition vs 23% controls (p = 0.002)

Stringer et al. (2015) [37] Rheumatology transition clinic Canada Paediatric rheumatology clinic Any RMD but majority JIA 2 years prior to completion of high school None specific No checklists used 3–6 combined MDT clinics per year with adult rheumatologist present Yes

Aim to transfer when finished high school and their disease is quiescent

17–20 years

Questionnaire

Follow-up rate post transfer

Overall satisfaction

Variation in the adequacy of how transition issues were addressed

High rate of follow-up post transfer

Walter et al. (2018) [38] Clinical transition pathway for adolescents with juvenile-onset RMD Netherlands Adolescent clinic in adult rheumatology setting RMD 12–14 years None specific Individualised transition plans (ITP) [33]

Clinical pathway

Dedicated adolescent clinic

Yes 17–18 depending on the patient’s perceived skills, personal wishes in discussion with health professionals

Review of electronic patient records

Frequency of dropout of care

Use of ITPs

Transfer experience: OYOF-TES [39]

Self-efficacy scale OYOF-SES [40]

Reduced loss to follow-up

High scores for satisfaction and self-efficacy