Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVES: To develop quality indicators for evaluating and improving care for patients with systemic sclerosis. METHODS: We developed quality indicators using a modified RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method. A systematic literature review identified candidate items from previous systemic sclerosis quality indicator studies and clinical practice guidelines. A multidisciplinary expert panel of 10 physicians specializing in rheumatology, dermatology, pediatrics and cardiology completed two anonymous rating rounds, with item revision after a web-based panel meeting. One physiotherapist and one patient with systemic sclerosis participated as non-voting observers. Items with a median appropriateness score of 7 or higher and strict agreement were retained. RESULTS: The review identified 86 candidate items from three quality indicator studies and 23 clinical practice guidelines. After first-round rating and discussion, 78 revised items underwent second-round evaluation. Thirty-three indicators met the prespecified selection criteria. The final set covered general management, lung, gastrointestinal, kidney, heart, pulmonary hypertension, vascular, muscle, rehabilitation, and pediatric domains. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a 33-item quality indicator set for systemic sclerosis through a structured consensus process. The indicators may support quality assessment and improvement in Japanese clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hatano et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: