Productivity loss due to absenteeism and presenteeism by different instruments in patients with RA and subjects without RA

Objectives. To explore the impact of at-work productivity loss on the total productivity cost by different instruments in patients recently diagnosed with RA and controls without RA. \ud \ud Methods. Cross-sectional data were collected from outpatients with RA between December 2007 and February 2008. The control group was formed by subjects without RA matched on age and gender. Absenteeism and presenteeism were estimated by the Quantity and Quality (QQ) Questionnaire, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire General Health V2.0 (WPAI-GH) and Health and Labor Questionnaire (HLQ) questionnaires. Differences between groups were tested by Mann–Whitney U-test. Costs were valued by the human capital approach. \ud \ud Results. Data were available from 62 patients with a paid job and 61 controls. QQ- and WPAI-GH scores of presenteeism were moderately correlated (r = 0.61) while the HLQ presenteeism score correlated poorly with the other instruments (r = 0.34). The contribution of presenteeism on total productivity costs was estimated at ∼70% in the RA group. The mean costs per person per week due to presenteeism varied between €79 and €318 per week in the RA group, dependent on the instrument used. The costs due to presenteeism were about two to four times higher in the RA group compared with the control group. \ud \ud Conclusion. This study indicates that the impact of presenteeism on the total productivity costs in patients with RA is high. However, work productivity in individuals without RA was not optimal either, which implies a risk of overestimation of cost when a normal score is not taken into account. Finally, different presenteeism instruments lead to different results

Validation of automatic joint space width measurements in hand radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis

Computerized methods promise quick, objective, and sensitive tools to quantify progression of radiological damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Measurement of joint space width (JSW) in finger and wrist joints with these systems performed comparable to the Sharp-van der Heijde score (SHS). A next step toward clinical use, validation of precision and accuracy in hand joints with minimal damage, is described with a close scrutiny of sources of error. A recently developed system to measure metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints was validated in consecutive hand images of RA patients. To assess the impact of image acquisition, measurements on radiographs from a multicenter trial and from a recent prospective cohort in a single hospital were compared. Precision of the system was tested by comparing the joint space in mm in pairs of subsequent images with a short interval without progression of SHS. In case of incorrect measurements, the source of error was analyzed with a review by human experts. Accuracy was assessed by comparison with reported measurements with other systems. In the two series of radiographs, the system could automatically locate and measure 1003/1088 (92.2%) and 1143/1200 (95.3%) individual joints, respectively. In joints with a normal SHS, the average (SD) size of MCP joints was [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] in the two series of radiographs, and of PIP joints [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. The difference in JSW between two serial radiographs with an interval of 6 to 12 months and unchanged SHS was [Formula: see text], indicating very good precision. Errors occurred more often in radiographs from the multicenter cohort than in a more recent series from a single hospital. Detailed analysis of the 55/1125 (4.9%) measurements that had a discrepant paired measurement revealed that variation in the process of image acquisition (exposure in 15% and repositioning in 57%) was a more frequent source of error than incorrect delineation by the software (25%). Various steps in the validation of an automated measurement system for JSW of MCP and PIP joints are described. The use of serial radiographs from different sources, with a short interval and limited damage, is helpful to detect sources of error. Image acquisition, in particular repositioning, is a dominant source of error

Validation of automatic joint space width measurements in hand radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis

Computerized methods promise quick, objective, and sensitive tools to quantify progression of radiological damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Measurement of joint space width (JSW) in finger and wrist joints with these systems performed comparable to the Sharp-van der Heijde score (SHS). A next step toward clinical use, validation of precision and accuracy in hand joints with minimal damage, is described with a close scrutiny of sources of error. A recently developed system to measure metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints was validated in consecutive hand images of RA patients. To assess the impact of image acquisition, measurements on radiographs from a multicenter trial and from a recent prospective cohort in a single hospital were compared. Precision of the system was tested by comparing the joint space in mm in pairs of subsequent images with a short interval without progression of SHS. In case of incorrect measurements, the source of error was analyzed with a review by human experts. Accuracy was assessed by comparison with reported measurements with other systems. In the two series of radiographs, the system could automatically locate and measure 1003/1088 (92.2%) and 1143/1200 (95.3%) individual joints, respectively. In joints with a normal SHS, the average (SD) size of MCP joints was [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text] in the two series of radiographs, and of PIP joints [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text]. The difference in JSW between two serial radiographs with an interval of 6 to 12 months and unchanged SHS was [Formula: see text], indicating very good precision. Errors occurred more often in radiographs from the multicenter cohort than in a more recent series from a single hospital. Detailed analysis of the 55/1125 (4.9%) measurements that had a discrepant paired measurement revealed that variation in the process of image acquisition (exposure in 15% and repositioning in 57%) was a more frequent source of error than incorrect delineation by the software (25%). Various steps in the validation of an automated measurement system for JSW of MCP and PIP joints are described. The use of serial radiographs from different sources, with a short interval and limited damage, is helpful to detect sources of error. Image acquisition, in particular repositioning, is a dominant source of error