Healthy snacks in hospitals : testing the potential effects of changes in availability

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the food retail staff and managers in each location and the food retailers who provided access to their sales data. Funding: Study 1 was funded by the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office [CGA/16/17]. Study 2 was conducted while JA was a Royal Society of Edinburgh Sabbatical Grant Holder. Open access via Sage agreementPeer reviewedPostprin

The effect of COVID19 public health restrictions on the health of people with musculoskeletal conditions and symptoms : the CONTAIN study

Funding This work was supported by Versus Arthritis [Grant Number: 20748] and the British Society for Rheumatology. The funding for the original studies included were from Versus Arthritis (MAmMOTH) and the British Society for Rheumatology (BSRBR-AS and BSR-PsA). Daniel Whibley is supported by a Versus Arthritis Foundation Fellowship [Grant Number 21742] Acknowledgements We are grateful to help from staff at the National Ankylosing Spondylitis Society and specifically to patient partners Lynne Laidlaw (for help with designing questionnaire) and Susan Davis (for commenting on the manuscript). The authors do not report any conflicts of interest. GJM conceived the idea for the study and all authors were involved in the detailed planning. MH, KK, EM-B and MB were responsible for obtaining ethics and research governance approvals. MB undertook the analysis which was independently verified by GTJ. GJM, with input from MB, drafted the manuscript, and all authors contributed important intellectual content via written comments. We thank Linda Dean for comments on the manuscript. Data Availability Statement The data within the article which relate to the collection of BSR register data are owned by the BSR – access to these data are subject to application being made to the BSR: Registers (rheumatology.org.uk) . For other data in the article, application can be made for access to the data by contacting the corresponding author.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Differences and similarities between the EULAR/ASAS-EULAR and national recommendations for treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis across Europe

This is the first report comparing EULAR and national treatment recommendations for PsA patients across Europe, and the first this decade to compare ASAS-EULAR and national treatment recommendations in axSpA patients. An electronic survey was completed from October 2021-April 2022 by rheumatologists in 15 European countries. One and four countries followed all EULAR and ASAS-EULAR recommendations, respectively. Five countries had no national treatment recommendations for PsA and/or axSpA, but followed other regulations. In several countries, national treatment recommendations predated the most recent EULAR/ASAS-EULAR recommendations. Entry criteria for starting biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs varied considerably. In several countries, for PsA patients with significant skin involvement, interleukin-17 inhibitors were not given preference. The positioning of Janus Kinase inhibitors differed and Phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors were not in use/reimbursed in most countries. This study may motivate European countries to update their national treatment recommendations, to align them better with the latest international recommendations

Commonalities and differences in set-up and data collection across European spondyloarthritis registries : results from the EuroSpA collaboration

Funding Open access funding provided by Royal Library, Copenhagen University Library The EuroSpA Research Collaboration Network was financially supported by Novartis Pharma AG. Novartis had no influence on the data collection, statistical analyses, manuscript preparation or decision to submit the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Differences and similarities between the EULAR/ASAS-EULAR and national recommendations for treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis across Europe

Summary: This is the first report comparing EULAR and national treatment recommendations for PsA patients across Europe, and the first this decade to compare ASAS-EULAR and national treatment recommendations in axSpA patients. An electronic survey was completed from October 2021–April 2022 by rheumatologists in 15 European countries. One and four countries followed all EULAR and ASAS-EULAR recommendations, respectively. Five countries had no national treatment recommendations for PsA and/or axSpA, but followed other regulations. In several countries, national treatment recommendations predated the most recent EULAR/ASAS-EULAR recommendations. Entry criteria for starting biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs varied considerably. In several countries, for PsA patients with significant skin involvement, interleukin-17 inhibitors were not given preference. The positioning of Janus Kinase inhibitors differed and Phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors were not in use/reimbursed in most countries. This study may motivate European countries to update their national treatment recommendations, to align them better with the latest international recommendations