Clinical practice guidelines for the foot and ankle in rheumatoid arthritis: a critical appraisal

Background: Clinical practice guidelines are recommendations systematically developed to assist clinical decision-making and inform healthcare. In current rheumatoid arthritis (RA) guidelines, management of the foot and ankle is under-represented and the quality of recommendation is uncertain. This study aimed to identify and critically appraise clinical practice guidelines for foot and ankle management in RA. Methods: Guidelines were identified electronically and through hand searching. Search terms 'rheumatoid arthritis', 'clinical practice guidelines' and related synonyms were used. Critical appraisal and quality rating were conducted using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Results: Twenty-four guidelines were included. Five guidelines were high quality and recommended for use. Five high quality and seven low quality guidelines were recommended for use with modifications. Seven guidelines were low quality and not recommended for use. Five early and twelve established RA guidelines were recommended for use. Only two guidelines were foot and ankle specific. Five recommendation domains were identified in both early and established RA guidelines. These were multidisciplinary team care, foot healthcare access, foot health assessment/review, orthoses/insoles/splints, and therapeutic footwear. Established RA guidelines also had an 'other foot care treatments' domain. Conclusions: Foot and ankle management for RA features in many clinical practice guidelines recommended for use. Unfortunately, supporting evidence in the guidelines is low quality. Agreement levels are predominantly 'expert opinion' or 'good clinical practice'. More research investigating foot and ankle management for RA is needed prior to inclusion in clinical practice guidelines

Provision of foot health services for people with rheumatoid arthritis in New South Wales: a web-based survey of local podiatrists

Background: It is unclear if podiatric foot care for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in New South Wales (NSW) meets current clinical recommendations. The objective of this study was to survey podiatrists' perceptions of the nature of podiatric foot care provision for people who have RA in NSW.Methods: An anonymous, cross-sectional survey with a web-based questionnaire was conducted. The survey questionnaire was developed according to clinical experience and current foot care recommendations. State registered podiatrists practising in the state of NSW were invited to participate. The survey link was distributed initially via email to members of the Australian Podiatry Association (NSW), and distributed further through snowballing techniques using professional networks. Data was analysed to assess significant associations between adherence to clinical practice guidelines, and private/public podiatry practices.Results: 86 podiatrists participated in the survey (78% from private practice, 22% from public practice). Respondents largely did not adhere to formal guidelines to manage their patients (88%). Only one respondent offered a dedicated service for patients with RA. Respondents indicated that the primary mode of accessing podiatry was by self-referral (68%). Significant variation was observed regarding access to disease and foot specific assessments and treatment strategies. Assessment methods such as administration of patient reported outcome measures, vascular and neurological assessments were not conducted by all respondents. Similarly, routine foot care strategies such as prescription of foot orthoses, foot health advice and footwear were not employed by all respondents.Conclusions: The results identified issues in foot care provision which should be explored through further research. Foot care provision in NSW does not appear to meet the current recommended standards for the management of foot problems in people who have RA. Improvements to foot care could be undertaken in terms of providing better access to examination techniques and treatment strategies that are recommended by evidence based treatment paradigms. © 2013 Hendry et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

The contribution of musculoskeletal disorders in multimorbidity: Implications for practice and policy

People frequently live for many years with multiple chronic conditions (multimorbidity) that impair health outcomes and are expensive to manage. Multimorbidity has been shown to reduce quality of life and increase mortality. People with multimorbidity also rely more heavily on health and care services and have poorer work outcomes. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are ubiquitous in multimorbidity because of their high prevalence, shared risk factors, and shared pathogenic processes amongst other long-term conditions. Additionally, these conditions significantly contribute to the total impact of multimorbidity, having been shown to reduce quality of life, increase work disability, and increase treatment burden and healthcare costs. For people living with multimorbidity, MSDs could impair the ability to cope and maintain health and independence, leading to precipitous physical and social decline. Recognition, by health professionals, policymakers, non-profit organisations, and research funders, of the impact of musculoskeletal health in multimorbidity is essential when planning support for people living with multimorbidity

What impact does written information about fatigue have on patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases? : Findings from a qualitative study

Objectives Although fatigue is a common symptom for people with rheumatic diseases, limited support is available. This study explored the impact of written information about fatigue, focusing on a booklet, Fatigue and arthritis. Methods Thirteen patients with rheumatic disease and fatigue were recruited purposively from a rheumatology outpatient service. They were interviewed before and after receiving the fatigue booklet. Two patients, plus six professionals with relevant interests, participated in a focus group. Transcripts were analysed thematically and a descriptive summary was produced. Results Interviewees consistently reported that fatigue made life more challenging, and none had previously received any support to manage it. Reflecting on the booklet, most said that it had made a difference to how they thought about fatigue, and that this had been valuable. Around half also said that it had affected, or would affect, how they managed fatigue. No one reported any impact on fatigue itself. Comments from interviewees and focus group members alike suggested that the research process may have contributed to the changes in thought and behaviour reported. Its key contributions appear to have been: clarifying the booklet's relevance; prompting reflection on current management; and introducing accountability. Conclusions This study indicated that written information can make a difference to how people think about fatigue and may also prompt behaviour change. However, context appeared to be important: it seems likely that the research process played a part and that the impact of the booklet may have been less if read in isolation. Aspects of the research appearing to facilitate impact could be integrated into routine care, providing a pragmatic (relatively low-cost) response to an unmet need

Which subgroup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis benefits from switching to rituximab versus alternative anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) agents after previous failure of an anti-TNF agent?

BACKGROUND: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to TNF antagonists (aTNFs) may switch to an alternative aTNF or start treatment from a different class of drugs, such as rituximab (RTX). It remains unclear in which clinical settings these therapeutic strategies offer most benefit. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the effectiveness of RTX versus alternative aTNFs on RA disease activity in different subgroups of patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of patients with RA who discontinued at least one aTNF and subsequently received either RTX or an alternative aTNF, nested within the Swiss RA registry (SCQM-RA) was carried out. The primary outcome, longitudinal improvement in 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28), was analysed using multivariate regression models for longitudinal data and adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of the 318 patients with RA included; 155 received RTX and 163 received an alternative aTNF. The relative benefit of RTX varied with the type of prior aTNF failure: when the motive for switching was ineffectiveness to previous aTNFs, the longitudinal improvement in DAS28 was significantly better with RTX than with an alternative aTNF (p = 0.03; at 6 months, -1.34 (95% CI -1.54 to -1.15) vs -0.93 (95% CI -1.28 to -0.59), respectively). When the motive for switching was other causes, the longitudinal improvement in DAS28 was similar for RTX and alternative aTNFs (p = 0.40). These results were not significantly modified by the number of previous aTNF failures, the type of aTNF switches, or the presence of co-treatment with a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. CONCLUSION: This observational study suggests that in patients with RA who have stopped a previous aTNF treatment because of ineffectiveness changing to RTX is more effective than switching to an alternative aTNF

A genome-wide association study suggests contrasting associations in ACPA-positive versus ACPA-negative rheumatoid arthritis

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be divided into two major subsets based on the presence or absence of antibodies to citrullinated peptide antigens (ACPA). Until now, data from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have only been published from ACPA-positive subsets of RA or from studies that have not separated the two subsets. The aim of the current study is to provide and compare GWAS data for both subsets.Methods and resultsGWAS using the Illumina 300K chip was performed for 774 ACPA-negative patients with RA, 1147 ACPA-positive patients with RA and 1079 controls from the Swedish population-based case-control study EIRA. Imputation was performed which allowed comparisons using 1,723,056 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). No SNP achieved genome-wide significance (2.9 × 10⁻⁸) in the comparison between ACPA-negative RA and controls. A case-case association study was then performed between ACPA-negative and ACPA-positive RA groups. The major difference in this analysis was in the HLA region where 768 HLA SNPs passed the threshold for genome-wide significance whereas additional contrasting SNPs did not reach genome-wide significance. However, one SNP close to the RPS12P4 locus in chromosome 2 reached a p value of 2 × 10⁶ and this locus can thus be considered as a tentative candidate locus for ACPA-negative RA.ConclusionsACPA-positive and ACPA-negative RA display significant risk allele frequency differences which are mainly confined to the HLA region. The data provide further support for distinct genetic aetiologies of RA subsets and emphasise the need to consider them separately in genetic as well as functional studies of this disease

Radiographic joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis is associated with differences in cartilage turnover and can be predicted by serum biomarkers: an evaluation from 1 to 4 years after diagnosis

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to determine whether serum biomarkers for degradation and synthesis of the extracellular matrix of cartilage are associated with, and can predict, radiographic damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Clinical and radiographic data of 87 RA patients were recorded 1 year after disease onset and then annually up to four years. Serum concentrations of four cartilage biomarkers were determined at these time points: a neoepitope formed by collagenase cleavage of type II collagen (C2C), a neoepitope formed by collagenase cleavage of type II collagen as well as type I collagen (C1,2C), a carboxy propeptide of type II procollagen formed during synthesis (CPII), and a cartilage proteoglycan aggrecan turnover epitope (CS846-epitope). Biomarker concentrations between patients with rapid radiographic progression (>7.3 Sharp/van der Heijde units per year) and those with slow radiographic progression (<2.3 units per year) were compared. In addition, we evaluated the long-term and short-term predictive value of each biomarker for progression of radiographic damage. RESULTS: Patients with rapid radiographic progression had higher C2C, higher C1,2C, and higher CS846-epitope levels than slow progressors. CPII levels showed no differences. Most importantly, the long-term radiographic progression for C2C, for C1,2C, and for CS846-epitope can be predicted by the biomarker value at year 1 after disease onset. C2C was also a predictor for joint space narrowing and annual radiographic damage during the subsequent year. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the concentration of serum biomarkers of cartilage collagen breakdown and proteoglycan turnover, but not of collagen synthesis, are related to joint destruction in RA. The use of these biomarkers may be of value when studying progression of joint damage in patients with RA

Validation of the reshaped shared epitope HLA-DRB1 classification in rheumatoid arthritis

Recently, we proposed a classification of HLA-DRB1 alleles that reshapes the shared epitope hypothesis in rheumatoid arthritis (RA); according to this model, RA is associated with the RAA shared epitope sequence (72–74 positions) and the association is modulated by the amino acids at positions 70 and 71, resulting in six genotypes with different RA risks. This was the first model to take into account the association between the HLA-DRB1 gene and RA, and linkage data for that gene. In the present study we tested this classification for validity in an independent sample. A new sample of the same size and population (100 RA French Caucasian families) was genotyped for the HLA-DRB1 gene. The alleles were grouped as proposed in the new classification: S(1 )alleles for the sequences A-RAA or E-RAA; S(2 )for Q or D-K-RAA; S(3D )for D-R-RAA; S(3P )for Q or R-R-RAA; and X alleles for no RAA sequence. Transmission of the alleles was investigated. Genotype odds ratio (OR) calculations were performed through conditional logistic regression, and we tested the homogeneity of these ORs with those of the 100 first trio families (one case and both parents) previously reported. As previously observed, the S(2 )and S(3P )alleles were significantly over-transmitted and the S(1), S(3D )and X alleles were under-transmitted. The latter were grouped as L alleles, resulting in the same three-allele classification. The risk hierarchy of the six derived genotypes was the same: (by decreasing OR and with L/L being the reference genotype) S(2)/S(3P), S(2)/S(2), S(3P)/S(3P), S(2)/L and S(3P)/L. The homogeneity test between the ORs of the initial and the replication samples revealed no significant differences. The new classification was therefore considered validated, and both samples were pooled to provide improved estimates of RA risk genotypes from the highest (S(2)/S(3P )[OR 22.2, 95% confidence interval 9.9–49.7]) to the lowest (S(3P)/L [OR 4.4, 95% confidence interval 2.3–8.4])

Research priorities for arthritis professional education

No Abstract.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/37787/1/1780340218_ftp.pd

Validation of the GALS musculoskeletal screening exam for use in primary care: a pilot study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>As the proportion of the Canadian population ≥65 grows, so too does the prevalence of musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. Approximately 20% of visits to family physicians occur as a result of MSK complaints. The GALS (Gait, Arms, Legs, and Spine) screening examination was developed to assist in the detection of MSK abnormalities. Although MSK exams are primarily performed by rheumatologists or other MSK specialists, expanding their use in primary health care may improve the detection of MSK conditions allowing for earlier treatment. The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the use of the GALS locomotor screen in primary care by comparing the results of assessments of family physicians with those of rheumatologists. The secondary goal was to examine the incidence of MSK disorders and assess the frequency with which new diagnoses not previously documented in patients' charts were identified.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients ≥65 years old recruited from an academic family health centre were examined by a rheumatologist and a family physician who recorded the appearance of each participant's gait and the appearance and movement of the arms, legs and spine by deeming them normal or abnormal. GALS scores were compared between physicians with the proportion of observed (P_obs), positive (P_pos) and negative (P_neg) agreement being the primary outcomes. Kappa statistics were also calculated. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the number of "new" diagnoses by comparing rheumatologists' findings with each patient's family practice chart.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 99 patients consented to participate (92 with previously diagnosed MSK conditions). Results showed reasonable agreement between family physicians and rheumatologists; P_obs= 0.698, P_pos= 0.614 and P_neg= 0.752. The coefficient of agreement (estimated Kappa) was 0.3675 for the composite GALS score. For individual components of the GALS exam, the highest agreement between family physicians and rheumatologists was in the assessment of gait and arm movement.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Previously reported increases in undiagnosed signs and symptoms of musculoskeletal conditions have highlighted the need for a simple yet sensitive screening exam for the identification of musculoskeletal abnormalities. Results of this study suggest that family physicians can efficiently use the GALS examination in the assessment of populations with a high proportion of musculoskeletal issues.</p