Objective The aim was to audit the use, indications, complications and patient information regarding HCQ treatment in rheumatology clinics in a tertiary referral centre. Methods During a 9-month period, we identified all patients prescribed HCQ and attending rheumatology clinics in one hospital. We established: (i) the indication for HCQ; (ii) the prevalence of HCQ overdosing based on absolute body weight (ABW); (iii) documentation of warning of risk of retinal toxicity; (iv) systemic and ocular co-morbidities; (v) ocular symptoms during treatment; and (vi) reasons for stopping HCQ. Results We identified 427 patients (104 male and 323 female). The cumulative dose of HCQ was lower in RA (median 365 g; range 6–1752 g) compared with SLE (450 g; 66–1788 g) ( P = 0.105). The median duration of HCQ therapy was 4 years (range 0.1–13 years); 28% of patients with RA and 29% with SLE continued HCQ beyond 5 years. After adjusting for ABW and renal function, 10% (31/312) had been prescribed doses exceeding recommendations. Formal documentation of counselling on ocular complications was found in only one-third of patients. Three cases of HCQ retinopathy were identified (all of whom had RA). Conclusion HCQ therapy is being used for >5 years in 29% of patients with rheumatic diseases, with higher than recommended doses in ∼10% of patients. We recommend more rigorous scrutiny of the use of HCQ to reduce the risk of retinopathy.

No abstract

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to use a spiritual screening question to quantify the prevalence of spiritual distress (SD) in a large cohort of seriously ill patients at admission to home-based palliative care (HBPC) and to examine the associations between SD with symptom burden, quality of life and hospital-based utilisation up to 6 months after admission to HBPC.MethodsData for this cohort study (n=658) were drawn from a pragmatic comparative-effectiveness trial testing two models of HBPC. At admission to HBPC, SD was measured using a global question (0–10-point scale: none=0; mild=1–4; moderate-to-severe=5+); symptoms and quality of life were measured with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and PROMIS-10. Hospital utilisation was captured using electronic records and claims. Median regression and proportional hazard competing risk models assessed the association between SD with symptoms and quality of life, and hospital utilisation, respectively.ResultsNearly half of the patients/proxies reported some level of SD. Increasing SD was significantly associated with higher symptom burden (increase of 7–14 points on ESAS) and worse mental well-being (decrease of 2.7 to 4.6 points on PROMIS-10-mental) in adjusted models. Compared with patients/proxies who reported no SD, those with at least some level of SD were not at increased risk for hospital-based utilisation over a median follow-up period of 2 months.ConclusionWhile SD is cross-sectionally associated with worse symptoms and mental well-being, it did not predict downstream hospital-based utilisation. Our results highlight the importance of assessing for and managing SD in patients with serious illness.