The relationship between pain and depression and anxiety in patients with inflammatory arthritis: a systematic review protocol.

Pain is a major challenge for patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA). Depression and anxiety are common comorbidities in IA, associating with worse outcomes. How they relate to pain is uncertain, with existing systematic reviews (a) mainly considering cross-sectional studies, (b) focusing on the relationship between pain and mental health in the context of disease activity/quality of life, and (c) not specifically considering the impact of treating depression/anxiety on pain. This PROSPERO-registered (CRD42023411823) systematic review will address this knowledge-gap by synthesizing evidence to summarise the associations (and potential mediators) between pain and depression/anxiety and evaluate the impact of treating co-morbid depression/anxiety on pain in IA. Relevant databases will be searched, articles screened and their quality appraised (using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools) by two reviewers. Eligible studies will include adults with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritis, be a clinical trial or observational study, and either (a) report the relationship between pain and depression/anxiety (observational studies/baseline trials), or (b) randomise participants to a pharmacological or psychological treatment to manage depression/anxiety with a pain outcome as an endpoint (trials). To synthesise data on the association between pain and depression/anxiety, where available adjusted coefficients from regression models will be pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. A synthesis without meta-analysis will summarise mediators. To evaluate the impact of treating depression/anxiety on pain, endpoint mean differences between treatment arms will be combined in a random-effects meta-analysis. Through understanding how depression/anxiety contribute to pain in IA, our review has the potential to help optimise approaches to IA pain.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and stringent social distancing measures on health-related quality of life and COVID-19 infection rates in patients with rheumatic disease: a longitudinal analysis through the pandemic.

Objective: The aim was to evaluate the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and stringent social isolation measures on patients with rheumatic disease (RD) from the beginning of the pandemic (April 2020). Methods: In this UK-based single-centre, prospective, observational cohort study, all RD follow-up patients at our centre were invited by SMS text message in April 2020 to participate in the study. Participants completed questionnaires at four time points between April 2020 and December 2021. We collected demographics, clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) status, short form 12 mental (MCS) and physical health component scores (PCS) for health-related quality of life, vaccination status, COVID-19 infection rates and incidence of long COVID. Results: We enrolled 1605 patients (female, 69.0%; CEV, 46.5%); 906 of 1605 (56.4%) completed linked responses to our final questionnaire. MCS improved (+0.6, P < 0.05), whereas PCS scores deteriorated (-1.4, P < 0.001) between April 2020 and December 2021. CEV patients had worse mental and physical health scores than non-CEV patients at entry (PCS, 36.7 and 39.3, respectively, P < 0.001; MCS, 40.9 and 43.0, respectively, P < 0.001) and at each time point throughout the study; both mental and physical health outcomes were worse in CEV compared with non-CEV patients (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). At study close, 148 of 906 (16.3%) reported COVID infection, with no difference in infection, vaccination or long COVID rates between CEV and non-CEV patients. Conclusions: Mental and physical health in RD patients has changed throughout the pandemic; outcomes for both metrics of health were worse in CEV patients, although there were no differences in infection rates between the groups. These data might assist the understanding and planning of future health-care policy and social restrictions in RD patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04542031.

Role of cardiac magnetic resonance strain analysis in patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome in evaluating right ventricular (dys)function: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Right ventricular dysfunction predicts death in patients with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS), but differences in morphology and loading conditions make calculation of the ejection fraction (EF), a challenging measure of its function. Our goal was to evaluate how strain measurements with cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking could be used to evaluate right ventricular function in patients with HLHS. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed by 2 independent researchers using the terms 'population', 'intervention', 'comparison', 'outcome' and 'time criteria'. PubMed and the Ovid database were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Our review included 8 studies with 608 participants with ventricular strain values obtained using cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking. After stage I palliation, global strain was reduced in patients after a hybrid procedure and a right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery conduit compared with a modified Blalock-Taussig shunt despite similar EFs. Global longitudinal strain did not differ between stage II and stage III (Fontan) palliation. Fontan patients had significantly impaired global longitudinal and circumferential strain compared to the left ventricular strain of the controls. Studies of Fontan patients that included patients with HLHS who were part of a cohort with a single right ventricle showed impaired global circumferential strain compared with the cohort with a single left ventricle, with controls, and over time. In this group, impaired global circumferential strain was associated with major adverse cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac magnetic resonance feature tracking can be used in patients with HLHS to evaluate RV strain and demonstrate differences between surgical strategies, over time and compared with controls. It could be used alongside clinical symptoms and EF values to detect ventricular dysfunction.