Impact of Symptoms on Daily Life in People at Risk of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objectives: To explore the impact on daily life of symptoms experienced by those with systemic autoimmunity associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: Fifteen people took part in focus groups to explore the impact of symptoms on daily life. Results: Core themes included: 1) physical impact of limited hand function and mobility; 2) psychological distress experienced included a fear of symptoms progressing into RA, uncertainty about the future, feelings of despair, shame and frustration. Conclusion: People with arthralgia at risk of developing RA experienced considerable physical and psychological impact of symptoms. Greater consideration should be given to the needs of people at risk of developing RA

A biopsychosocial network model of fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review

Fatigue in RA is prevalent, intrusive and disabling. We propose a network model of fatigue encompassing multiple and mutually interacting biological, psychological and social factors. Guided by this model, we reviewed the literature to offer a comprehensive overview of factors that have been associated with fatigue in RA. Six categories of variables were found: physical functioning, psychological functioning, medical status, comorbidities and symptoms, biographical variables and miscellaneous variables. We then systematically reviewed associations between fatigue and factors commonly addressed by rheumatology health professionals. Correlations of fatigue with physical disability, poor mental well-being, pain, sleep disturbance and depression and anxiety were ∼0.50. Mostly these correlations remained significant in multivariate analyses, suggesting partly independent influences on fatigue and differences between individuals. These findings indicate the importance of research into individual-specific networks of biopsychosocial factors that maintain fatigue and tailored interventions that target the influencing factors most relevant to that person

Fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis

This is an editorial and does not contain an abstract

Training and delivery of a novel fatigue intervention: a qualitative study of rheumatology health-care professionals’ experiences

ObjectivesSuccessful, non-pharmacological research interventions are challenging to implement in clinical practice. The aim of the study was to understand the experiences of rheumatology nurses and occupational therapists (tutors) delivering a novel fatigue intervention in a trial setting, and their views on requirements for clinical implementation. After training, tutors delivered courses of a manualized group cognitive-behavioural intervention to patients with RA in a seven-centre randomized controlled trial [Reducing Arthritis Fatigue by clinical Teams using cognitive-behavioural approaches (RAFT)], which demonstrated reduced fatigue impact at 2 years.MethodsFourteen tutors participated in interviews, and eight tutors also participated in a focus group. Data were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.ResultsThe following five main themes were identified: ‘exciting but daunting’ reflected the mixture of excitement and anxiety in intervention training and delivery; ‘skills practice and demonstrations were essential’ captured the value of learning and practising together, even though the process could be uncomfortable; ‘an individual approach to a standardized intervention’ showed how tutors negotiated adherence to the manual with delivery using their own words; ‘becoming a better practitioner’ described how participation enhanced tutors’ wider clinical practice; and ‘pragmatic and flexible’ highlighted practical adaptations to facilitate training and intervention roll out.ConclusionThese insights inform strategies for clinical implementation of an evidence-based intervention that addresses a patient priority, with implications for other successful research interventions. Tutors believed that the skills acquired during RAFT enhanced their wider clinical practice, which highlights the benefits of upskilling members of clinical teams to provide self-management support to patients

Staff’s views on delivering patient-led therapy during inpatient stroke rehabilitation: a focus group study with lessons for trial fidelity

Background; Fidelity to the treatment protocol is key to successful trials but often problematic. This article reports the staff’s views on delivering a complex rehabilitation intervention: patient-led therapy during inpatient stroke care. Methods; An exploratory qualitative study using focus groups with staff involved in a multicenter (n = 12) feasibility trial of patient-led therapy (the MAESTRO trial) was undertaken as part of the evaluation process. Purposive sampling ensured that participants represented all recruiting sites, relevant professions and levels of seniority. Data analysis used a Framework Approach. Results; Five focus groups were held involving 30 participants. Five main themes emerged: the effect of the interventions, practical problems, patient-related factors, professional dilemmas, and skills. Staff felt the main effect of the therapies was on patients’ autonomy and occupation; the main practical problems were the patients’ difficulties in achieving the correct position and a lack of space. Staff clearly identified characteristics that made patient-led therapy unsuitable for some patients. Most staff experienced dilemmas over how to prioritize the trial interventions compared to their usual therapy and other clinical demands. Staff also lacked confidence about how to deliver the interventions, particularly when adapting the interventions to individual needs. For each barrier to implementation, possible solutions were identified. Of these, involving other people and establishing a routine were the most common. Conclusions; Delivering rehabilitation interventions within a trial is complex. Staff require time and support to develop the skills, strategies and confidence to identify suitable patients, deliver new treatments, adapt the new treatments to individuals’ needs and balance the demands of delivering the trial intervention according to the treatment protocol with other clinical and professional priorities

Efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions: a systematic review informing the 2023 EULAR recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases

OBJECTIVE: To identify the best evidence on the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions in reducing fatigue in people with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (I-RMDs) and to summarise their safety in the identified studies to inform European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology recommendations for the management of fatigue in people with I-RMDs. METHODS: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with I-RMDs conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook. Search strategy ran in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Complete, PEDro, OTseeker and PsycINFO. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and synthesis were performed by two reviewers independently. Data were pooled in meta-analyses. RESULTS: From a total of 4150 records, 454 were selected for full-text review, 82 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and 55 RCTs were included in meta-analyses. Physical activity or exercise was efficacious in reducing fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (standardised mean differences (SMD)=-0.23, 95% CI=-0.37 to -0.1), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (SMD=-0.54, 95% CI=-1.07 to -0.01) and spondyloarthritis (SMD=-0.94, 95% CI=-1.23 to -0.66); reduction of fatigue was not significant in Sjögren's syndrome (SMD=-0.83, 95% CI=-2.13 to 0.47) and systemic sclerosis (SMD=-0.66, 95% CI=-1.33 to 0.02). Psychoeducational interventions were efficacious in reducing fatigue in RA (SMD=-0.32, 95% CI=-0.48 to -0.16), but not in SLE (SMD=-0.19, 95% CI=-0.46 to 0.09). Follow-up models in consultations (SMD=-0.05, 95% CI=-0.29 to 0.20) and multicomponent interventions (SMD=-0.20, 95% CI=-0.53 to 0.14) did not show significant reductions of fatigue in RA. The results of RCTs not included in the meta-analysis suggest that several other non-pharmacological interventions may provide a reduction of fatigue, with reassuring safety results. CONCLUSIONS: Physica activity or exercise and psychoeducational interventions are efficacious and safe for managing fatigue in people with I-RMDs

A Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) Ensemble Classification Model: An Alternative Architecture for Hierarchical Classification

In this paper, a hierarchical ensemble classification approach that utilizes a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) structure is proposed as a solution to the multi-class classification problem. Two main DAG structures are considered: (i) rooted DAG, and (ii) non-rooted DAG. The main challenges that are considered in this paper are: (i) the successive misclassification issue associated with hierarchical classification, and (i) identification of the starting node within the non-rooted DAG approach. To address these issues the idea is to utilize Bayesian probability values to: select the best starting DAG node, and to dictate whether single or multiple paths should be followed within the DAG structure. The reported experimental results indicated that the proposed DAG structure is more effective than when using a simple binary tree structure for generating a hierarchical classification model.</p

Rheumatology clinicians' experiences of brief training and implementation of skills to support patient self-management

Background: Self-management of arthritis requires informed, activated patients to manage its physical and psychosocial consequences. Patient activation and self-management can be enhanced through the use of cognitive-behavioural approaches, which have a strong evidence base and provide insight into the variation in outcome of patients with ostensibly the same degree of disease activity. However, training for rheumatology health professionals in theory and skills underpinning the facilitation of self-management is not widely available. To develop such training, this study explored rheumatology clinicians' experiences of a variety of brief skills training courses to understand which aspects were helpful or unhelpful, and to identify the barriers and facilitators of applying the skills in clinical practice. Methods. 16 clinicians who had previously attended communication and self-management skills training participated in semi-structured interviews: 3 physicians, 3 physiotherapists, 4 nurses, 6 occupational therapists. Transcripts were analysed (ED) using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic approach, with a subset independently analysed (SH, RG-H, RJ). Results: 3 overarching themes captured views about training undertaken and subsequent use of approaches to facilitate self-management. In 'putting theory into practice', clinicians felt that generic training was not as relevant as rheumatology-specific training. They wanted a balance between theory and skills practice, and identified the importance of access to ongoing support. In 'challenging professional identity', models of care and working cultures influenced learning and implementation. Training often challenged a tendency to problem-solve on behalf of patients and broadened clinicians' remit from a primary focus on physical symptoms to the mind and body interaction. In 'enhanced practice', clinicians viewed consultations as enhanced after training. Focus had shifted from clinicians' agendas to those of patients, and clinicians reported eliciting patients' priorities and the use of theoretically-driven strategies such as goal-setting. Conclusions: To varying extents, clinicians were able to learn and implement new approaches to support patient self-management after brief training. They believed that cognitive behavioural and communication skills to facilitate self-management enhanced their practice. To optimise self-management support in routine care brief, skills-based, rheumatology-specific training needs to be developed, alongside ongoing clinical supervision. Further research should examine patients' perspectives of care based on these approaches. © 2014 Dures et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd