Assessing acceptability and identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation of the EULAR recommendations for patient education in inflammatory arthritis: a mixed-methods study with rheumatology professionals in 23 European and Asian countries.

OBJECTIVES: To disseminate and assess the level of acceptability and applicability of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for patient education among professionals in rheumatology across Europe and three Asian countries and identify potential barriers and facilitators to their application. METHODS: A parallel convergent mixed-methods design with an inductive approach was used. A web-based survey, available in 20 different languages, was distributed to health professionals by non-probability sampling. The level of agreement and applicability of each recommendation was assessed by (0-10) rating scales. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were assessed using free-text responses. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data by content analysis and presented in 16 categories supported by quotes. RESULTS: A total of 1159 completed the survey; 852 (73.5%) were women. Most of the professionals were nurses (n=487), rheumatologists (n=320), physiotherapists (n=158). For all recommendations, the level of agreement was high but applicability was lower. The four most common barriers to application were lack of time, lack of training in how to provide patient education, not having enough staff to perform this task and lack of evaluation tools. The most common facilitators were tailoring patient education to individual patients, using group education, linking patient education with diagnosis and treatment and inviting patients to provide feedback on patient education delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This project has disseminated the EULAR recommendations for patient education to health professionals across 23 countries. Potential barriers to their application were identified and some are amenable to change, namely training patient education providers and developing evaluation tools.

Disseminating and assessing implementation of the EULAR recommendations for patient education in inflammatory arthritis: a mixed-methods study with patients' perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To explore patients' agreement and reasons for agreement or disagreement with the EULAR recommendations for patient education (PE) for people with inflammatory arthritis (IA). METHODS: This mixed-method survey collected data using snowball sampling. The survey had been translated into 20 languages by local healthcare professionals, researchers and patient research partners. It explored the degree to which patients with IA agreed with each recommendation for PE (0=do not agree at all and 10=agree completely) and their rationale for their agreement level in free text questions. Descriptive statistics summarised participants' demographics and agreement levels. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyse the free text data. Sixteen subcategories were developed, describing the reasons for agreement or disagreement with the recommendations, which constituted the categories. RESULTS: The sample comprised 2779 participants (79% female), with a mean (SD) age 55.1 (13.1) years and disease duration 17.1 (13.3) years. Participants strongly agreed with most recommendations (median 10 (IQR: 9-10) for most recommendations). Reasons for agreement with the recommendations included the benefit of using PE to facilitate collaborative care and shared decision making, the value of flexible and tailored PE, and the value of gaining support from other patients. Reasons for disagreement included lack of resources for PE, not wanting information to be tailored by healthcare professionals and a reluctance to use telephone-based PE. CONCLUSION: The EULAR recommendations for PE have been disseminated among patients with IA. Overall, agreement levels were very high, suggesting that they reflect patients' preferences for engaging in collaborative clinical care and using PE to facilitate and supplement their own understanding of IA. Reasons for not completely agreeing with the recommendations can inform implementation strategies and education of healthcare professionals.

Provision of foot and ankle care services for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease across Europe.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to explore the variation in the provision of care for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), and foot and ankle problems between European healthcare systems. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was developed and piloted in seven countries prior to being distributed to the presidents of all 22 national health professionals in rheumatology associations within the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR). Summary data were obtained using SPSS V22. Ethical approval was sought from the Medical Research Ethics Committee of University of Malaga (CEUMA-91-2015-H). RESULTS: Sixteen questionnaires (73% response rate) were completed (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK). All 16 respondents indicated that foot and ankle healthcare services were provided in their country, but only three countries had services specializing in RMD-related foot and ankle problems (the Netherlands, the UK and Malta). The professions providing care varied, depending on the pathology and the country. Foot and ankle pain was mostly treated by rheumatologists and physiotherapists; foot and ankle deformities by orthopaedic surgeons and orthotist/prosthetists; and foot and ankle ulcers by nurses. Services were predominantly delivered through the public sector, and in secondary care (hospital) settings. CONCLUSIONS: Only three countries reported having specialist foot and ankle services addressing the needs of people with RMDs. Variation was seen in the professions which provided care between countries, and also between the foot and ankle pathologies cared for. There is a lack of clinical pathways and guidelines for the management of patients with RMD-related foot and ankle problems.

Development of the Italian Version of the Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire in Subjects with Chronic Low Back Pain: Cross-cultural Adaptation, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Reliability and Validity.

BACKGROUND: Growing attention is being given to cognitive-behavioural measures to improve interventions for spinal disorders. The Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ) has never been validated in Italian subjects with chronic low back pain (LBP). PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is translating, culturally adapting and validating the Italian version of PVAQ (PVAQ-I). METHODS: A cross-sectional evaluation of the psychometric properties of the PVAQ-I on patients with chronic LBP was conducted. The questionnaire was culturally adapted in accordance with international standards. The psychometric testing included confirmatory factor analysis, reliability by internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC); construct validity by comparing the PVAQ-I with the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS), the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS), the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ), a Numerical Rating Scale of pain intensity (NRS) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI); and sensitivity to change by calculating the smallest detectable change. RESULTS: The PVAQ-I was administered to 131 subjects with chronic LBP (77 females, mean age of 48 ± 16 years, median symptoms duration of 12 months). Factor analysis confirmed a two-factor (passive awareness and active vigilance), 13-item solution, which led to an acceptable data-model fit. Internal consistency (α = 0.91) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.92) were good. As a priori hypothesized, construct validity showed moderate correlations between the PVAQ-I and PCS (r = 0.60), TSK (r = 0.44) and HADS-Anxiety (r = 0.53) and low correlations with HADS-Depression (r = 0.28), NRS (r = 0.28), ODI (r = 0.23) and CPAQ (r = -0.12). The smallest detectable change was 9. CONCLUSION: The PVAQ was successfully translated into Italian and proved to have satisfactory psychometric properties. Its use is recommended for clinical and research purposes.

Promotion of health-enhancing physical activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparative study on healthcare providers in Italy, The Netherlands and Sweden.

The objectives of this study were to compare attitudes, practice of advice, perceived competencies and educational needs related to health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) among Dutch, Italian and Swedish healthcare providers (HCP) and to explore associations between these factors and age, gender and HEPA levels of HCP. Questionnaires were sent to 2939 HCP, members of their national rheumatology organizations. HEPA was assessed with the Short Questionnaire to Assess Health-Enhancing Physical Activity or the International Physical Activity Questionnaire; attitudes, practice of advice, perceived competencies and educational needs with a 23-item questionnaire. Overall response rate was 33 %. Ninety-five percent of HCP agreed that HEPA is an important health goal in RA. More Swedish HCP had positive attitudes to the attainability and safety of HEPA in RA. There were no differences between countries in practice of advice on HEPA to patients with RA in general or to those with recent onset disease, but more Italian HCP were reluctant to advise HEPA to patients with established disease. Of the total HCP, 36 to 60 % used public health guidelines to advise on HEPA, with Dutch HCP taking less advantage. Still they estimated a higher proportion of patients with RA to follow such advice. Italian HCP perceived their competencies the highest, but were also more interested in education to promote HEPA. Gender, age and HEPA performance had no association with attitudes toward HEPA, while a number of associations were found between these factors and practice of advice and perceived competencies. The differences found between HCP in the three countries might indicate the need for educational initiatives to improve HEPA promotion.

EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee osteoarthritis.

The objective was to develop evidence -based recommendations and a research and educational agenda for the non-pharmacological management of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). The multidisciplinary task force comprised 21 experts: nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, rheumatologists, orthopaedic surgeons, general practitioner, psychologist, dietician, clinical epidemiologist and patient representatives. After a preliminary literature review, a first task force meeting and five Delphi rounds, provisional recommendations were formulated in order to perform a systematic review. A literature search of Medline and eight other databases was performed up to February 2012. Evidence was graded in categories I-IV and agreement with the recommendations was determined through scores from 0 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). Eleven evidence-based recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee OA were developed, concerning the following nine topics: assessment, general approach, patient information and education, lifestyle changes, exercise, weight loss, assistive technology and adaptations, footwear and work. The average level of agreement ranged between 8.0 and 9.1. The proposed research agenda included an overall need for more research into non-pharmacological interventions for hip OA, moderators to optimise individualised treatment, healthy lifestyle with economic evaluation and long-term follow-up, and the prevention and reduction of work disability. Proposed educational activities included the required skills to teach, initiate and establish lifestyle changes. The 11 recommendations provide guidance on the delivery of non-pharmacological interventions to people with hip or knee OA. More research and educational activities are needed, particularly in the area of lifestyle changes.

Chronic pain acceptance questionnaire: confirmatory factor analysis, reliability, and validity in Italian subjects with chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional evaluation of the psychometric properties of a translated questionnaire. OBJECTIVE: To validate the Italian version of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) to allow its use with Italian-speaking patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Growing attention is being given to cognitive-behavioral measures to improve interventions for LBP. The CPAQ has never been validated in Italian subjects with chronic LBP. METHODS: The psychometric testing included confirmatory factor analysis, reliability by internal consistency (Cronbach α), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient), sensitivity to change by calculating the smallest detectable change, and construct validity by comparing CPAQ with a pain numerical rating scale, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire Scale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (Pearson correlations). Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were computed to further investigate construct validity of the CPAQ subscales. RESULTS: The questionnaire was administered to 142 subjects with chronic LBP. Factor analysis confirmed a 2-factor (viz., Activities Engagement and Pain Willingness) 20-item solution, achieving a good data-model fit. Internal consistency (α = 0.88) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.86) were good. The smallest detectable change was 22. Construct validity showed a moderate correlation between the CPAQ and numerical rating scale (r = -0.485), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire Scale (r = -0.594), and Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (r = -0.595), and a close correlation with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (r = -0.610 for the Anxiety score and r = -0.659 for the Depression score) and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (r = -0.658). The standardized regression coefficients for Activity Engagement were significant in all of the equations, and those for Pain Willingness were significant in the anxiety, depression, and disability equations. CONCLUSION: The Italian CPAQ had a good factorial structure and psychometric properties that replicated the results of other versions. Its use is recommended for clinical and research purposes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Chronic neck pain and treatment of cognitive and behavioural factors: results of a randomised controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Although there is growing evidence in favour of the bio-psychosocial approach to the treatment of persistent neck pain, it is questioned whether treating psychological factors can improve patient perceptions of disability, pain and quality of life. This randomised, controlled study with 12 months' follow-up was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of adding cognitive-behavioural principles to exercises for chronic neck pain. METHODS: Eighty patients were randomly assigned to the usual neck exercises plus cognitive-behavioural treatment (PTcb group, 40 subjects) or to treatment based on neck exercises alone (PT group, 40 subjects). Before treatment (T1), at the end of treatment (T2) and 12 months later (T3), all of the patients completed a booklet including the Neck Pain and Disability Scale, a numerical rating scale, and the Short-Form Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36). RESULTS: The present trial failed to demonstrate its primary end point: the pre- and post-treatment difference in total NPDS scores was not statistically different between groups. Disability improved similarly in both groups over time, remaining stable until T3 in the PTcb group and slightly increasing at the same time in the PT group. Pain trends were comparable, with both groups showing an improvement between T1 and T2, and a slight worsening between T2 and T3. There were significant increases in all of the SF-36 domains except for health in general, and vitality in both groups by the end of treatment. SF-36 showed a between-group difference only for the physical activity domain (10.4; 95% CI 2.4-18.5). CONCLUSION: Disability, pain and quality of life improved at the end of treatment in both groups, without differences between them.

The Italian version of the Sickness Impact Profile-Roland Scale for chronic pain: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, validity and sensitivity to change.

PURPOSE: As no adapted form of the 23-item Sickness Impact Profile (SIP)-Roland Scale for patients with chronic pain has ever been validated in the Italian population, the aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate an Italian version. METHODS: The development of the Italian version involved translation and back-translation, a final review by an expert committee and the testing of the pre-final version to establish its correspondence with the original. The psychometric testing included testing reliability by internal consistency (Cronbach's α) and test-retest repeatability (intraclass coefficient correlation; ICC), construct validity by comparison with an 11-point pain intensity numerical rating scale (NRS; Pearson's correlation) and the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36; Pearson's correlation) and sensitivity to change by calculating the minimum detectable change (MDC). RESULTS: It took 3 months to obtain a shared version of the scale, which was administered to 243 subjects and proved to be satisfactorily acceptable. It had a high degree of internal consistency (α = 0.860) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.972). Construct validity testing revealed a moderate correlation with the NRS (r = 0.418), close correlations with the SF-36 physical subscales and moderate-poor correlations with the mental and social subscales; the MDC was 2.33. CONCLUSIONS: The SIP-Roland scale was successfully translated into Italian, showing satisfactory psychometric properties. The measure can be recommended for use in research and clinical practice to improve the assessment of physical dysfunction in subjects with chronic pain.