Abstract
Background Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is a common rheumatological disorder of older patients. The majority of UK patients are diagnosed and managed exclusively in general practice. In primary care, it has been shown that there is wide variation in practice, and established diagnostic criteria are infrequently used.
Aim This study aims to investigate the diagnostic processes, management, and monitoring of patients with PMR in UK primary care.
Design and setting This is a retrospective cohort study set in primary care.
Method Data were extracted from two interlinked primary care databases from north Staffordshire. Patients with PMR were identified using Read Codes and the relevant investigation, prescription, and consultation data were extracted and reviewed.
Results Three hundred and four patients’ records were analysed. Documentation of symptoms leading to a diagnosis of PMR was found in 248 records (81.6%). A documented process of exclusion of relevant differential diagnoses was demonstrated in 68 (22.4%) patients. The mean initial dose of prednisolone was 21.5 mg. Referral to specialist care was made for 135 (44.4%) patients. Gastric prophylaxis was prescribed in 85 (28.0%) cases. Osteoporosis prophylaxis was prescribed to 183 patients (60.2%); 12 patients (3.9%) developed osteoporosis and 56 (18.4%) developed gastric symptoms that led to GP consultation.
Conclusion The management of PMR in general practice could be optimised. Identified areas for improvement include clear documentation of a process of exclusion of other diagnoses, and prophylaxis for potential treatment complications, including osteoporosis and gastric symptoms.
- Received August 30, 2012.
- Revision received October 15, 2012.
- Accepted December 17, 2012.
- © British Journal of General Practice 2013
This is an OpenAccess article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.