Value of self-performed joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis patients near remission

INTRODUCTION: To determine the validity and reliability of patients' self-performed joint counts compared to joint counts by professional assessors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in different disease activity states. METHODS: In patients with established RA we determined the inter-rater reliability of joint counts performed by an independent evaluator and the patient using intraclass correlation (ICC), and agreement on activity in individual joints by kappa statistics. We also performed longitudinal analyses to assess consistency of assessments over time. Finally, we investigated the concordance of joint counts of different assessors in patients with different levels of disease activity. RESULTS: The reliability of patient self-performed joint counts was high when compared to independent objective assessment (ICC; 95%confidence interval (CI)) for the assessment of swelling (0.32; 0.15 to 0.46) and tenderness (0.75; 0.66 to 0.81), with higher agreement for larger joints (kappa: 0.57 and 0.45, respectively) compared to smaller joints (metacarpo-phalangeal joint (MCPs): 0.31 and 0.45; and proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPs): 0.22 and 0.47, for swelling and tenderness, respectively). Patients in remission according to the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI ≤ 3.3) showed better concordance of the joint counts (swollen joint count (SJC) ties 25/37, tender joint count (TJC) ties 26/37) compared to moderate/high disease activity states (SDAI > 11; MDA/HDA: SJC ties 9/72, TJC ties 21/72). Positive and negative predictive values regarding the presence of SDAI remission were reasonably good (0.86 and 0.95, respectively). A separate training session for patients did not improve the reliability of joint assessment. The results were consistent in the longitudinal analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Self-performed joint counts are particularly useful for monitoring in patients having attained remission, as these patients seem able to detect state of remission

Comorbidity burden in axial spondyloarthritis: a cluster analysis

Objectives To examine how comorbidities cluster in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and whether these clusters are associated with quality of life, global health and other outcome measures. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of consecutive patients meeting ASAS criteria for axSpA in Liverpool, UK. Outcome measures included quality of life (EQ5D), global health and disease activity (BASDAI). We used hierarchical cluster analysis to group patients according to 38 pre-specified comorbidities. In multivariable linear models, the associations between distinct comorbidity clusters and each outcome measure were compared, using axSpA patients with no comorbidities as the reference group. Analyses were adjusted for age, gender, symptom duration, BMI, deprivation, NSAID-use and smoking. Results We studied 419 patients (69% male, mean age 46 years). 255 patients (61%) had at least one comorbidity, among whom the median number was 1 (range 1–6). Common comorbidities were hypertension (19%) and depression (16%). Of 15 clusters identified, the most prevalent clusters were hypertension-coronary heart disease and depression-anxiety. Compared with patients with no comorbidities, the fibromyalgia-irritable bowel syndrome cluster was associated with adverse patient-reported outcome measures; these patients reported 1.5-unit poorer global health (95%CI 0.01, 2.9), reduced quality of life (0.25-unit lower EQ5D; 95%CI −0.37, −0.12) and 1.8-unit higher BASDAI (95% CI 0.4, 3.3). Similar effect estimates were found for patients in the depression-anxiety cluster. Conclusion Comorbidity is common among axSpA patients. The two most common comorbidities were hypertension and depression. Patients in the depression-anxiety and fibromyalgia-IBS clusters reported poorer health and increased axSpA severity

Personal non-commercial use only

ABSTRACT. Objective. To describe the treatment profile of multimorbid patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in contrast to patients with RA only. Methods. COMORA (Comorbidities in Rheumatoid Arthritis) is a cross-sectional, international study assessing morbidities, outcomes, and treatment of patients with RA. Patients were grouped according to their multimorbidity profile assessed by a counted multimorbidity index (cMMI). Conclusion. In this study, the odds of bDMARD use decreases 11% for each additional chronic morbid condition after adjustment for regional differences, disease activity, and other covariates

What benefit-risk trade-offs are acceptable to rheumatoid arthritis patients during treatment selection? Evidence from a multicountry choice experiment

Objective Understanding preferences of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can facilitate tailored patient-centric care. This study elicited trade-offs that patients with RA were willing to make during treatment selection. Methods Patients with RA completed an online discrete choice experiment, consisting of a series of choices between hypothetical treatments. Treatment attributes were selected based on literature review and qualitative patient interviews. Eligible patients were ≥18 years old, diagnosed with RA, receiving systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy, and residents of Europe or USA. Male patients were oversampled for subgroup analyses. Data were analysed using a correlated mixed logit model. Results Of 2090 participants, 42% were female; mean age was 45.2 years (range 18-83). Estimated effects were significant for all attributes (p&lt;0.001) but varied between patients. Average relative attribute importance scores revealed different priorities (p&lt;0.001) between males and females. While reducing pain and negative effect on semen parameters was most important to males, females were most concerned by risk of blood clots and serious infections. No single attribute explained treatment preferences by more than 30%. Preferences were also affected by patients' age: patients aged 18-44 years placed less importance on frequency and mode of treatment administration (p&lt;0.05) than older age groups. Patients were willing to accept higher risk of serious infections and blood clots in exchange for improvements in pain, daily activities or administration convenience. However, acceptable trade-offs varied between patients (p&lt;0.05). Conclusion Treatment preferences of patients with RA were individual-specific, but driven by benefits and risks, with no single attribute dominating the decision-making.</p

Prevalence of comorbidities in rheumatoid arthritis and evaluation of their monitoring: results of an international, cross-sectional study (COMORA)

Background: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of developing comorbid conditions.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of comorbidities and compare their management in RA patients from different countries worldwide.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Methods Study design: international, cross-sectional. Patients: consecutive RA patients. Data collected: demographics, disease characteristics (activity, severity, treatment), comorbidities (cardiovascular, infections, cancer, gastrointestinal, pulmonary, osteoporosis and psychiatric disorders).&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Results: Of 4586 patients recruited in 17 participating countries, 3920 were analysed (age, 56±13 years; disease duration, 10±9 years (mean±SD); female gender, 82%; DAS28 (Disease Activity Score using 28 joints)–erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 3.7±1.6 (mean±SD); Health Assessment Questionnaire, 1.0±0.7 (mean±SD); past or current methotrexate use, 89%; past or current use of biological agents, 39%. The most frequently associated diseases (past or current) were: depression, 15%; asthma, 6.6%; cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke), 6%; solid malignancies (excluding basal cell carcinoma), 4.5%; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 3.5%. High intercountry variability was observed for both the prevalence of comorbidities and the proportion of subjects complying with recommendations for preventing and managing comorbidities. The systematic evaluation of comorbidities in this study detected abnormalities in vital signs, such as elevated blood pressure in 11.2%, and identified conditions that manifest as laboratory test abnormalities, such as hyperglycaemia in 3.3% and hyperlipidaemia in 8.3%.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; Conclusions: Among RA patients, there is a high prevalence of comorbidities and their risk factors. In this multinational sample, variability among countries was wide, not only in prevalence but also in compliance with recommendations for preventing and managing these comorbidities. Systematic measurement of vital signs and laboratory testing detects otherwise unrecognised comorbid conditions.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt

Rheumatology training experience across Europe : Analysis of core competences

Publisher Copyright: © 2016 The Author(s). Copyright: Copyright 2019 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.Background: The aim of this project was to analyze and compare the educational experience in rheumatology specialty training programs across European countries, with a focus on self-reported ability. Method: An electronic survey was designed to assess the training experience in terms of self-reported ability, existence of formal education, number of patients managed and assessments performed during rheumatology training in 21 core competences including managing specific diseases, generic competences and procedures. The target population consisted of rheumatology trainees and recently certified rheumatologists across Europe. The relationship between the country of training and the self-reported ability or training methods for each competence was analyzed through linear or logistic regression, as appropriate. Results: In total 1079 questionnaires from 41 countries were gathered. Self-reported ability was high for most competences, range 7.5-9.4 (0-10 scale) for clinical competences, 5.8-9.0 for technical procedures and 7.8-8.9 for generic competences. Competences with lower self-reported ability included managing patients with vasculitis, identifying crystals and performing an ultrasound. Between 53 and 91 % of the trainees received formal education and between 7 and 61 % of the trainees reported limited practical experience (managing ≤10 patients) in each competence. Evaluation of each competence was reported by 29-60 % of the respondents. In adjusted multivariable analysis, the country of training was associated with significant differences in self-reported ability for all individual competences. Conclusion: Even though self-reported ability is generally high, there are significant differences amongst European countries, including differences in the learning structure and assessment of competences. This suggests that educational outcomes may also differ. Efforts to promote European harmonization in rheumatology training should be encouraged and supported.publishersversionPeer reviewe