Cargando…
Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers
BACKGROUND: The majority of undiagnosed diseases manifest with objective findings that warrant further investigation. The Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) receives applications from patients whose symptoms and signs have been intractable to diagnosis; however, many UDN applicants are affected prim...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6106923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30134969 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3458-2 |
_version_ | 1783349872625188864 |
---|---|
author | Walley, Nicole M. Pena, Loren D. M. Hooper, Stephen R. Cope, Heidi Jiang, Yong-Hui McConkie-Rosell, Allyn Sanders, Camilla Schoch, Kelly Spillmann, Rebecca C. Strong, Kimberly McCray, Alexa T. Mazur, Paul Esteves, Cecilia LeBlanc, Kimberly Wise, Anastasia L. Shashi, Vandana |
author_facet | Walley, Nicole M. Pena, Loren D. M. Hooper, Stephen R. Cope, Heidi Jiang, Yong-Hui McConkie-Rosell, Allyn Sanders, Camilla Schoch, Kelly Spillmann, Rebecca C. Strong, Kimberly McCray, Alexa T. Mazur, Paul Esteves, Cecilia LeBlanc, Kimberly Wise, Anastasia L. Shashi, Vandana |
author_sort | Walley, Nicole M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The majority of undiagnosed diseases manifest with objective findings that warrant further investigation. The Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) receives applications from patients whose symptoms and signs have been intractable to diagnosis; however, many UDN applicants are affected primarily by subjective symptoms such as pain and fatigue. We sought to characterize presenting symptoms, referral sources, and demographic factors of applicants to the UDN to identify factors that may determine application outcome and potentially differentiate between those with undiagnosed diseases (with more objective findings) and those who are less likely to have an undiagnosed disease (more subjective symptoms). METHODS: We used a systematic retrospective review of 151 consecutive Not Accepted and 50 randomly selected Accepted UDN applications. The primary outcome was whether an applicant was Accepted, or Not Accepted, and, if accepted, whether or not a diagnosis was made. Objective and subjective symptoms and information on prior specialty consultations were collected from provider referral letters. Demographic data and decision data on network acceptance were gathered from the UDN online portal. RESULTS: Fewer objective findings and more subjective symptoms were found in the Not Accepted applications. Not Accepted referrals also were from older individuals, reported a shorter period of illness, and were referred to the UDN by their primary care physicians. All of these differences reached statistical significance in comparison with Accepted applications. The frequency of subspecialty consults for diagnostic purposes prior to UDN application was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The preponderance of subjective and lack of objective findings in the Not Accepted applications distinguish these from applicants that are accepted for evaluation and diagnostic efforts through the UDN. Not Accepted applicants are referred primarily by their primary care providers after multiple specialist consultations fail to yield answers. Distinguishing between patients with undiagnosed diseases with objective findings and those with primarily subjective findings can delineate patients who would benefit from further diagnostic processes from those who may have functional disorders and need alternative pathways for management of their symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02450851, posted May 21st 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3458-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6106923 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61069232018-08-29 Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers Walley, Nicole M. Pena, Loren D. M. Hooper, Stephen R. Cope, Heidi Jiang, Yong-Hui McConkie-Rosell, Allyn Sanders, Camilla Schoch, Kelly Spillmann, Rebecca C. Strong, Kimberly McCray, Alexa T. Mazur, Paul Esteves, Cecilia LeBlanc, Kimberly Wise, Anastasia L. Shashi, Vandana BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The majority of undiagnosed diseases manifest with objective findings that warrant further investigation. The Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN) receives applications from patients whose symptoms and signs have been intractable to diagnosis; however, many UDN applicants are affected primarily by subjective symptoms such as pain and fatigue. We sought to characterize presenting symptoms, referral sources, and demographic factors of applicants to the UDN to identify factors that may determine application outcome and potentially differentiate between those with undiagnosed diseases (with more objective findings) and those who are less likely to have an undiagnosed disease (more subjective symptoms). METHODS: We used a systematic retrospective review of 151 consecutive Not Accepted and 50 randomly selected Accepted UDN applications. The primary outcome was whether an applicant was Accepted, or Not Accepted, and, if accepted, whether or not a diagnosis was made. Objective and subjective symptoms and information on prior specialty consultations were collected from provider referral letters. Demographic data and decision data on network acceptance were gathered from the UDN online portal. RESULTS: Fewer objective findings and more subjective symptoms were found in the Not Accepted applications. Not Accepted referrals also were from older individuals, reported a shorter period of illness, and were referred to the UDN by their primary care physicians. All of these differences reached statistical significance in comparison with Accepted applications. The frequency of subspecialty consults for diagnostic purposes prior to UDN application was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The preponderance of subjective and lack of objective findings in the Not Accepted applications distinguish these from applicants that are accepted for evaluation and diagnostic efforts through the UDN. Not Accepted applicants are referred primarily by their primary care providers after multiple specialist consultations fail to yield answers. Distinguishing between patients with undiagnosed diseases with objective findings and those with primarily subjective findings can delineate patients who would benefit from further diagnostic processes from those who may have functional disorders and need alternative pathways for management of their symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02450851, posted May 21st 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3458-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6106923/ /pubmed/30134969 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3458-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Walley, Nicole M. Pena, Loren D. M. Hooper, Stephen R. Cope, Heidi Jiang, Yong-Hui McConkie-Rosell, Allyn Sanders, Camilla Schoch, Kelly Spillmann, Rebecca C. Strong, Kimberly McCray, Alexa T. Mazur, Paul Esteves, Cecilia LeBlanc, Kimberly Wise, Anastasia L. Shashi, Vandana Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
title | Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
title_full | Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
title_fullStr | Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
title_full_unstemmed | Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
title_short | Characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
title_sort | characteristics of undiagnosed diseases network applicants: implications for referring providers |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6106923/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30134969 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3458-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT walleynicolem characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT penalorendm characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT hooperstephenr characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT copeheidi characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT jiangyonghui characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT mcconkierosellallyn characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT sanderscamilla characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT schochkelly characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT spillmannrebeccac characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT strongkimberly characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT mccrayalexat characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT mazurpaul characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT estevescecilia characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT leblanckimberly characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT wiseanastasial characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders AT shashivandana characteristicsofundiagnoseddiseasesnetworkapplicantsimplicationsforreferringproviders |