Patient-reported outcome measures for clinical decision-making in outpatient follow-up: validity and reliability of a renal disease questionnaire

Background Patient-reported outcome measures are increasingly used by clinicians to support communication in telephone- or face-to-face consultations with patients. A renal disease questionnaire has been developed, but not sufficiently evaluated through clinimetrics in clinical setting. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the content validity, construct validity and the test–retest reliability of a renal disease questionnaire to be used for clinical decision-making. Methods A content, construct validity and test–retest reliability study was conducted in 3 nephrology outpatient clinics in Central Denmark Region, Denmark. Content validity (face validity, comprehensibility and relevance) was assessed among 8 patients and 6 clinicians. Reliability was assessed by asking outpatients with chronic kidney disease to complete the questionnaire twice. Reliability was assessed by kappa statistics and agreement by percentage. Construct validity was determined using 4 a priori defined hypotheses and comparing 2 known groups. Results Five new domains emerged, 6 items were rephrased and 3 items were removed following the content validity test. A total of 160 patients completed the questionnaire with median 8 days (IQR 2 days) between assessments. The test–retest reliability parameters of the single items in the questionnaire were substantial to almost perfect as all the observed weighted kappa values ranged from 0.61 to 0.91, 95% CI (0.34 to 0.95). In total, 61% of the single items showed almost perfect agreement. In total, 3 of the 4 hypotheses were accepted and 44% of the items showed satisfying known-group discriminative validity. Conclusion A renal disease questionnaire used for clinical decision-making in outpatient follow-up showed acceptable content validity and substantial to almost perfect reliability. Sufficient construct validity was not established. Incorporating the questionnaire into routine clinical practice may improve the evaluation of disease burden in patients with chronic kidney disease

Effectiveness of remote care interventions : a systematic review informing the 2022 EULAR Points to Consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

Objective: To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) on different outcomes of remote care compared with face-to-face (F2F) care, its implementation into clinical practice and to identify drivers and barriers in order to inform a task force formulating the EULAR Points to Consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). Methods: A search strategy was developed and run in Medline (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently performed standardised data extraction, synthesis and risk of bias (RoB) assessment. Results: A total of 2240 references were identified. Forty-seven of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Remote monitoring (n=35) was most frequently studied, with telephone/video calls being the most common mode of delivery (n=30). Of the 34 studies investigating outcomes of remote care, the majority addressed efficacy and user perception; 34% and 21% of them, respectively, reported a superiority of remote care as compared with F2F care. Time and cost savings were reported as major benefits, technical aspects as major drawback in the 13 studies that investigated drivers and barriers of remote care. No study addressed remote care implementation. The main limitation of the studies identified was the heterogeneity of outcomes and methods, as well as a substantial RoB (50% of studies with high RoB). Conclusions: Remote care leads to similar or better results compared with F2F treatment concerning efficacy, safety, adherence and user perception outcomes, with the limitation of heterogeneity and considerable RoB of the available studies

Follow-Up of Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis in Specialist Health Care With Remote Monitoring and Self-Monitoring Compared With Regular Face-to-Face Follow-Up Visits (the ReMonit Study) : Protocol for a Randomized, Controlled Open-Label Noninferiority Trial

Funding Information: The ReMonit study and the qualitative substudy received funding from the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (funding number 2021062) and the Centre for Treatment of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (REMEDY), Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Norway (funding number 328657).Peer reviewe

Synthesis of guidance available for assessing methodological quality and grading of evidence from qualitative research to inform clinical recommendations: a systematic literature review

Objective To understand (1) what guidance exists to assess the methodological quality of qualitative research; (2) what methods exist to grade levels of evidence from qualitative research to inform recommendations within European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR). Methods A systematic literature review was performed in multiple databases including PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE and PsycINFO, from inception to 23 October 2020. Eligible studies included primary articles and guideline documents available in English, describing the: (1) development; (2) application of validated tools (eg, checklists); (3) guidance on assessing methodological quality of qualitative research and (4) guidance on grading levels of qualitative evidence. A narrative synthesis was conducted to identify key similarities between included studies. Results Of 9073 records retrieved, 51 went through to full-manuscript review, with 15 selected for inclusion. Six articles described methodological tools to assess the quality of qualitative research. The tools evaluated research design, recruitment, ethical rigour, data collection and analysis. Seven articles described one approach, focusing on four key components to determine how much confidence to place in findings from systematic reviews of qualitative research. Two articles focused on grading levels of clinical recommendations based on qualitative evidence; one described a qualitative evidence hierarchy, and another a research pyramid. Conclusion There is a lack of consensus on the use of tools, checklists and approaches suitable for appraising the methodological quality of qualitative research and the grading of qualitative evidence to inform clinical practice. This work is expected to facilitate the inclusion of qualitative evidence in the process of developing recommendations at EULAR level

2023 EULAR recommendations on imaging in diagnosis and management of crystal-induced arthropathies in clinical practice.

To formulate evidence-based recommendations and overarching principles on the use of imaging in the clinical management of crystal-induced arthropathies (CiAs). An international task force of 25 rheumatologists, radiologists, methodologists, healthcare professionals and patient research partners from 11 countries was formed according to the EULAR standard operating procedures. Fourteen key questions on the role of imaging in the most common forms of CiA were generated. The CiA assessed included gout, calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease and basic calcium phosphate deposition disease. Imaging modalities included conventional radiography, ultrasound, CT and MRI. Experts applied research evidence obtained from four systematic literature reviews using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Task force members provided level of agreement (LoA) anonymously by using a Numerical Rating Scale from 0 to 10. Five overarching principles and 10 recommendations were developed encompassing the role of imaging in various aspects of patient management: making a diagnosis of CiA, monitoring inflammation and damage, predicting outcome, response to treatment, guided interventions and patient education. Overall, the LoA for the recommendations was high (8.46-9.92). These are the first recommendations that encompass the major forms of CiA and guide the use of common imaging modalities in this disease group in clinical practice

Effects of diet on the outcomes of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs): systematic review and meta-analyses informing the 2021 EULAR recommendations for lifestyle improvements in people with RMDs

BackgroundA EULAR taskforce was convened to develop recommendations for lifestyle behaviours in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). In this paper, the literature on the effect of diet on the progression of RMDs is reviewed.MethodsSystematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed of studies related to diet and disease outcomes in seven RMDs: osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus, axial spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, systemic sclerosis and gout. In the first phase, existing relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses, published from 2013 to 2018, were identified. In the second phase, the review was expanded to include published original studies on diet in RMDs, with no restriction on publication date. Systematic reviews or original studies were included if they assessed a dietary exposure in one of the above RMDs, and reported results regarding progression of disease (eg, pain, function, joint damage).ResultsIn total, 24 systematic reviews and 150 original articles were included. Many dietary exposures have been studied (n=83), although the majority of studies addressed people with OA and RA. Most dietary exposures were assessed by relatively few studies. Exposures that have been assessed by multiple, well conducted studies (eg, OA: vitamin D, chondroitin, glucosamine; RA: omega-3) were classified as moderate evidence of small effects on disease progression.ConclusionThe current literature suggests that there is moderate evidence for a small benefit for certain dietary components. High-level evidence of clinically meaningful effect sizes from individual dietary exposures on outcomes in RMDs is missing

Measures used to assess interventions for increasing patient involvement in Danish healthcare setting: a rapid review

Objective: To identify measures used within Denmark evaluating any type of intervention designed to facilitate patient involvement in healthcare. Design: Environmental scan employing rapid review methods. Data sources: MEDLINE, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from 6–9 April 2021 from database inception up to the date of the search. Eligibility criteria: Quantitative, observational and mixed methods studies with empirical data on outcomes used to assess any type of intervention aiming to increase patient involvement with their healthcare. Language limitations were Danish and English. Data extraction and synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted data from 10% of the included studies and, due to their agreement, the data from the rest were extracted by first author. Data were analysed with reference to existing categories of measuring person-centred care; findings were synthesised using narrative summaries. Adapted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines were used to guide reporting. Results: Among 3767 records, 43 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 74 different measures used to evaluate interventions aimed at increasing patient involvement within healthcare in Danish hospital and community settings. Generic measures assessed: patient engagement (n=3); supporting self-management (n=8); supporting shared decision-making (n=9); patient satisfaction and experiences of care (n=11); health-related patient-reported outcome (n=20). Conclusions: Across Denmark, complex interventions designed to improve patient involvement with healthcare vary in their goals and content. Some targeting healthcare professionals, some patient health literacy and some service infrastructure. A plethora of measures assess the impact of these interventions on patient, professional and service delivery outcomes. Few measures assessed patient involvement directly, and it is unclear which proxy measures capture indicators of perceived involvement. Lack of conceptual clarity between intervention goals, the components of change and measures makes it difficult to see what types of intervention can best support change in services to ensure patients are more effectively involved in their healthcare

2021 EULAR recommendations for the implementation of self-management strategies in patients with inflammatory arthritis

© 2021 The Authors. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2021-220249Background: An important but often insufficient aspect of care in people with inflammatory arthritis (IA) is empowering patients to acquire a good understanding of their disease and building their ability to deal effectively with the practical, physical and psychological impacts of it. Self-management skills can be helpful in this regard. Objectives: To develop recommendations for the implementation of self-management strategies in IA. Methods: A multidisciplinary taskforce of 18 members from 11 European countries was convened. A systematic review and other supportive information (survey of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patient organisations) were used to formulate the recommendations. Results: Three overarching principles and nine recommendations were formulated. These focused on empowering patients to become active partners of the team and to take a more proactive role. The importance of patient education and key self-management interventions such as problem solving, goal setting and cognitive behavioural therapy were highlighted. Role of patient organisations and HCPs in promoting and signposting patients to available resources has been highlighted through the promotion of physical activity, lifestyle advice, support with mental health aspects and ability to remain at work. Digital healthcare is essential in supporting and optimising self-management and the HCPs need to be aware of available resources to signpost patients. Conclusion: These recommendations support the inclusion of self-management advice and resources in the routine management of people with IA and aim to empower and support patients and encourage a more holistic, patient-centred approach to care which could result in improved patient experience of care and outcomes.This project has received funding by the European League Against Rheumatism, Project number: PAR028.Published versio

Determinants of methotrexate adherence in rheumatoid arthritis patients

Abstract: In rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, weekly intake of methotrexate (MTX) is the basic drug treatment. This observational study aims to investigate how many RA patients are adherent in terms of MTX intake and to identify determinants of non-adherence. Intake of MTX (orally or via injection) was recorded in 129 RA patients with an electronic monitoring system (MEMS\uae) during 16 weeks. In addition, two adherence questionnaires, the Medication Adherence Report Scale (MARS-5) and the Compliance-Questionnaire-Rheumatology (CQR) as well as a visual analogue scale (VAS) measuring MTX adherence, were administered to these patients. As possible determinants of adherence, data on demographics, disease and treatment characteristics, depression, illness cognitions, motivation, and social support were collected. Of all participants, 58 % were fully adherent and 75 % skipped at most one dose during 16 weeks. A better mental health status and suffering from comorbidities had a positive effect on adherence, while living alone had a negative effect. These three predictors explained 30 % of the variance in MTX adherence. Of the three self-report medication adherence measures, the VAS correlated the highest with the results of the electronic monitoring system (r\u2009=\u20090.552, p\u2009=\u20090.01). A relatively high adherence rate was observed in RA patients treated with MTX. The determinants identified by this study could be used to screen patients at risk for non-adherence. A simple VAS scale seems to be an acceptable way for a preliminary screening of MTX adherence

Effectiveness of remote care interventions: A systematic review informing the 2022 EULAR Points to Consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

Objective: To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) on different outcomes of remote care compared with face-to-face (F2F) care, its implementation into clinical practice and to identify drivers and barriers in order to inform a task force formulating the EULAR Points to Consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).  Methods: A search strategy was developed and run in Medline (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently performed standardised data extraction, synthesis and risk of bias (RoB) assessment.  Results: A total of 2240 references were identified. Forty-seven of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Remote monitoring (n=35) was most frequently studied, with telephone/video calls being the most common mode of delivery (n=30). Of the 34 studies investigating outcomes of remote care, the majority addressed efficacy and user perception; 34% and 21% of them, respectively, reported a superiority of remote care as compared with F2F care. Time and cost savings were reported as major benefits, technical aspects as major drawback in the 13 studies that investigated drivers and barriers of remote care. No study addressed remote care implementation. The main limitation of the studies identified was the heterogeneity of outcomes and methods, as well as a substantial RoB (50% of studies with high RoB).  Conclusions: Remote care leads to similar or better results compared with F2F treatment concerning efficacy, safety, adherence and user perception outcomes, with the limitation of heterogeneity and considerable RoB of the available studies