Qualitative interview study of rheumatology patients' experiences of COVID-19 shielding to explore the physical and psychological impact and identify associated support needs.

OBJECTIVE: Many clinically extremely vulnerable rheumatology patients have only recently ceased shielding from COVID-19, while some continue to minimise in-person contact. The objective of this study was to understand the impact of shielding and associated support needs in patients with rheumatic conditions and to understand how rheumatology teams can meet these needs both currently and in future pandemics. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: The study was conducted in the Southwest of England using a case-study design. The participants were 15 patients with rheumatic conditions who were advised to shield and/or chose to shield at any time during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Qualitative data collected via telephone and online semi-structured interviews and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen interviews were conducted. Three main themes represent the data:'Just shove them over there in the corner' captures changes in patients' self-perception. They felt different to most other people, vulnerable and left behind. The initial sense of shock was followed by a sense of loss as changes became long term.'A long and lonely road' captures patients' psychological isolation due to a perceived lack of understanding and support. This included having to prove their health status and justify their shielding behaviours, which impacted their relationships. At times, they felt abandoned by their healthcare providers.'You can't just flip a switch' captures the difficulty of getting back to pre-pandemic normal after shielding. Patients did not recognise themselves physically and mentally. They wanted to collaborate with health professionals and identified the need for specific guidance to support their recovery. CONCLUSION: Patients are dealing with lasting physical and mental effects from shielding and consequences of delayed healthcare. Health professionals need time and resources to ask about patients' well-being, identify their health needs and refer/signpost to appropriate sources of support.

Stroke frequency, associated factors, and clinical features in primary systemic vasculitis: a multicentric observational study.

OBJECTIVES: The cerebral vessels may be affected in primary systemic vasculitis (PSV), but little is known about cerebrovascular events (CVEs) in this population. This study aimed to determine the frequency of CVEs at the time of diagnosis of PSV, to identify factors associated with CVEs in PSV, and to explore features and outcomes of stroke in patients with PSV. METHODS: Data from adults newly diagnosed with PSV within the Diagnostic and Classification Criteria in VASculitis (DCVAS) study were analysed. Demographics, risk factors for vascular disease, and clinical features were compared between patients with PSV with and without CVE. Stroke subtypes and cumulative incidence of recurrent CVE during a prospective 6-month follow-up were also assessed. RESULTS: The analysis included 4828 PSV patients, and a CVE was reported in 169 (3.50%, 95% CI 3.00-4.06): 102 (2.13% 95% CI 1.73-2.56) with stroke and 81 (1.68% 95% CI 1.33-2.08) with transient ischemic attack (TIA). The frequency of CVE was highest in Behçet's disease (9.5%, 95% CI 5.79-14.37), polyarteritis nodosa (6.2%, 95% CI 3.25-10.61), and Takayasu's arteritis (6.0%, 95% CI 4.30-8.19), and lowest in microscopic polyangiitis (2.2%, 95% CI 1.09-3.86), granulomatosis with polyangiitis (2.0%, 95% CI 1.20-3.01), cryoglobulinaemic vasculitis (1.9%, 95% CI 0.05-9.89), and IgA-vasculitis (Henoch-Schönlein) (0.4%, 95% CI 0.01-2.05). PSV patients had a 11.9% cumulative incidence of recurrent CVE during a 6-month follow-up period. CONCLUSION: CVEs affect a significant proportion of patients at time of PSV diagnosis, and the frequency varies widely among different vasculitis, being higher in Behçet's. Overall, CVE in PSV is not explained by traditional vascular risk factors and has a high risk of CVE recurrence.

Validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for giant cell arteritis.

OBJECTIVES: GCA is systemic vasculitis manifesting as cranial, ocular or large vessel vasculitis. A prior qualitative study developed 40 candidate items to assess the impact of GCA on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to determine final scale structure and measurement properties of the GCA patient reported outcome (GCA-PRO) measure. METHODS: Cross-sectional study included UK patients with clinician-confirmed GCA. They completed 40 candidate items for the GCA-PRO at times 1 and 2 (3 days apart), EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A, CAT-PROM5 and self-report of disease activity. Rasch and exploratory factor analyses informed item reduction and established structural validity, reliability and unidimensionality of the final GCA-PRO. Evidence of validity was also established with hypothesis testing (GCA-PRO vs other PRO scores, and between participants with 'active disease' vs those 'in remission') and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 428 patients: mean (s.d.) age 74.2 (7.2), 285 (67%) female; 327 (76%) cranial GCA, 114 (26.6%) large vessel vasculitis and 142 (33.2%) ocular involvement. Rasch analysis eliminated 10 candidate GCA items and informed restructuring of response categories into four-point Likert scales. Factor analysis confirmed four domains: acute symptoms (eight items), activities of daily living (seven items), psychological (seven items) and participation (eight items). The overall scale had adequate Rasch model fit (χ2 = 25.219, degrees of freedom = 24, P = 0.394). Convergent validity with EQ5D-5L, ICECAP-A and Cat-PROM5 was confirmed through hypothesis testing. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were excellent. CONCLUSION: The final GCA-PRO is a 30-item, four-domain scale with robust evidence of validity and reliability in measuring HRQoL in people with GCA.

Association of the AAV-PRO questionnaire with established outcome measures in AAV.

OBJECTIVES: The ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) patient-reported outcome (AAV-PRO) questionnaire was developed to capture the impact of AAV and its treatment. We investigated the association of specific AAV-PRO domains with disease activity and extent, damage, depression, health-related quality of life, and treatment. METHODS: In a prospective longitudinal study, AAV-PRO, Beck's depression inventory (BDI), Short Form 36 (SF-36), BVAS and Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI) were completed at baseline (t1) and after 3-6 months (t2). In addition, patient data (including diagnosis, therapies, relapses, and organ manifestations) were recorded. Data were analysed by t-tests and correlation-based regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients with AAV participated. The mean BVAS at the time of enrolment was 1.4 ± 3.74. The median AAV-PRO domain scores were higher in patients reporting 'active disease' compared with those reporting 'in remission' (P < 0.001). In the correlation analyses, all AAV-PRO domain scores correlated strongly with the BDI (all r ≥ 0.319, all P ≤ 0.001) as well as with all eight SF-36 subdomains (all |r|≥0.267, all P ≤ 0.001). The regression analyses showed that AAV-PRO domains were strongly predicted by the BDI and SF-36 domains (|ß| ≥ 0.240 for the strongest predictor of each domain). In the longitudinal comparison (t1/t2), there were no significant changes in the overall results. CONCLUSION: Our data show convergent validity for all AAV-PRO subdomains, using the established questionnaires BDI and SF-36. The AAV-PRO domains scores were not correlated with clinician-derived instruments (including the BVAS and the VDI). Thus, we regard the AAV-PRO questionnaire as a valuable measure of outcomes that might complement traditional end-points in clinical trials.

Validation of a new glucocorticoid-specific Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaire (the Steroid PRO).

OBJECTIVES: Glucocorticoids used in the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic conditions can impact on health-related quality of life. An underpinning qualitative study developed a long-list of candidate items for a treatment-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure. The objective of this paper is to determine scale structure and psychometric properties of the Steroid PRO. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of adults from the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand, taking glucocorticoids for a rheumatic disease. Initial survey collected demographics, clinical information, 40 Steroid PRO candidate items and EuroQol-5 Dimensions- 5 levels (EQ-5D-5L). Follow-up, 3-5 days later, collected Steroid PRO candidate items and a condition-change ('transition') question. Analysis included Rasch measurement model, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and hypothesis testing for discriminative validity, convergence validity and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Total responses 946: UK n=743 (79%); USA n=139 (15%); Australia/New Zealand n=64 (7%); mean age 57.6 (SD=13.6); 833 (88%) women. Participants with inflammatory arthritis n=197 (21%), connective tissue disease and/or vasculitis n=402 (42%), giant cell arteritis and/or polymyalgia rheumatica n=347 (37%). Twenty-five items were removed due to lack of fit to Rasch model. Of the remaining items, EFA suggested four subscales: Social impact (4 items); Impact on appearance (3 items); Psychological impact (5 items); Treatment concerns (3 items). Rasch modelling supported a four-subscale structure and total score, confirming construct validity and reliability. Hypothesis testing confirmed discriminant and convergence validity. Intraclass correlation coefficient (total score) was 0.809 demonstrating excellent (test-retest) reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The Steroid PRO is a 15-item, valid and reliable scale for measuring the impact of glucocorticoid therapy in people with rheumatic diseases.

Jaw claudication and jaw stiffness in giant cell arteritis: secondary analysis of a qualitative research dataset.

Objective: Jaw symptoms can be a vital clue to the diagnosis of GCA. Guidelines recommend more intensive treatment if jaw claudication is present. We sought to explore how patients with GCA described their jaw symptoms. Methods: We carried out a secondary, qualitative analysis of interview data from 36 participants from the UK (n = 25) and Australia (n = 11), originally collected in order to develop a patient-reported outcome measure for GCA. In all cases, GCA had been confirmed by biopsy/imaging. Interview transcripts were organized within QSR NVivo 12 software and analysed using template analysis. Themes were refined through discussion among the research team, including a patient partner. Results: Twenty of 36 participants reported jaw symptoms associated with GCA. The median age of these 20 participants was 76.5 years; 60% were female. Five themes were identified: physical sensations; impact on function; impact on diet; symptom response with CSs; and attribution to other causes. Physical sensations included ache, cramp, stiffness and 'lockjaw'. Functional impacts included difficulty in eating/chewing, cleaning teeth, speaking or opening the mouth. Dietary impacts included switching to softer food. Response to CSs was not always immediate. Jaw symptoms were initially mis-attributed by some participants to arthritis, age or viral illnesses; or by health-care professionals to a dental cavity, ear infection or teeth-grinding. Conclusion: Jaw symptoms in GCA are diverse and can lead to diagnostic confusion with primary temporomandibular joint disorder, potentially contributing to delay in GCA diagnosis. Further research is needed to determine the relationship of jaw stiffness to jaw claudication.

Consensus of the definitions of the OMERACT glucocorticoid impact core domain set for people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

BACKGROUND: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Glucocorticoid (GC) Impact Working Group has been working to develop a core domain set to measure the impact of GCs on patients living with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. The mandatory domains previously identified for inclusion in all clinical trials measuring the GC effects include infection, bone fragility, mood disturbance, hypertension, diabetes, weight, fatigue, and mortality. Before progressing to instrument selection, the Working Group sought to establish precise definitions of all mandatory domains within the core domain set. METHODS: OMERACT methodology was applied with the use of evidence and consensus-based decision making of all stakeholder groups (patient research partners, health care professionals, clinician researchers, industry members and methodologists) to develop detailed definitions for the broad domain, target domain and domain components, taking into consideration sources of variability that could affect measurement of the domain.  The working group synthesized prior qualitative studies, quantitative work, and results from Delphi rounds, to develop a rich definition of 'what' is to be measured. RESULTS: Between 2021 and 2023, the OMERACT Working Group on GC Impact conducted virtual meetings to establish domain definitions. First, we mapped each domain onto an OMERACT Core Area. All domains were primarily represented within the Pathophysiological Manifestations Core Area, except from Fatigue which was primarily Life Impact and Weight which spanned both Core Areas. Sources of variability included cultural factors, age, gender, education level, socioeconomic status, personal experiences, emotional state, and language barriers. The domain definitions will form the foundation for instrument selection and the initial step of domain / concept match and content validity in the OMERACT pillar of 'truth' before moving on to feasibility and discrimination. CONCLUSION: The OMERACT GC Impact Working Group has developed and agreed upon detailed domain definitions for core domains. Future steps of the working group are to select instruments and develop the core outcome measurement set for clinical trials measuring the impact of GC on patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

Nurse-led care for people with early rheumatoid arthritis: Interview study with thematic analysis.

AIMS: To develop an understanding of what comprises nurse-led care in early rheumatoid arthritis from the perspective of rheumatology nurse specialists in England. DESIGN: Qualitative study. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews with rheumatology nurse specialists in England were conducted in Summer 2020. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Reporting follows the appropriate elements of consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research. RESULTS: Sixteen nurses were recruited and interviews lasted 30-60 min. Four themes with 14 subthemes were identified. A SPECIALIST SERVICE DELIVERED BY EXPERIENCED RHEUMATOLOGY NURSES: Specialist care is provided by experienced nurse specialists with a high degree of autonomy in the rheumatology multidisciplinary team context. ADDRESSING PATIENTS' COMPLEX CARE NEEDS: Care is evidence-based and aims to start treatment, keep in treatment, educate and support. Access to psychology expertise is needed. CARE WITH COMPASSION USING PERSON-CENTRED, HOLISTIC AND EMPATHETIC APPROACHES: Nurses create patient relationships and a positive therapeutic environment. Nurse-led telephone advice lines are essential for treatment adjustment, patient support and empowerment. CONTINUED EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SERVICE: Consultations are reviewed, and patients are asked for feedback. The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruption, but changes streamlined procedures and improved documentation and communication. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led care in early rheumatoid arthritis is a specialist service delivered with compassion, addressing complex care needs and using person-centred approaches. This study identifies key aspects of care in early disease from the nurse perspective.

Patient-reported outcomes in vasculitis.

Systemic vasculitis encompasses a group of multisystem disorders; both the diseases and the treatment strategies can have a significant impact on a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) to evaluate the patient's view of their condition, treatments, and healthcare journey is essential to the patient-centered care approach. In this paper, we discuss the use of generic, disease-specific, and treatment-specific PROMs and PREMs in systemic vasculitis and future research goals.

Measuring the impact of steroid therapy on health-related quality of life in patients with rheumatic diseases: international development of a glucocorticoid treatment-specific patient-reported outcome measure.

OBJECTIVES: Glucocorticoids (GCs) ('steroids') are used to treat rheumatic diseases but adverse effects are common. We aimed to explore the impact of GC therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), to inform the development of a treatment-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for use in clinical trials and practice. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with patients from the UK, USA and Australia, treated for a rheumatic condition with GCs in the last 2 years. Purposive sampling was used to select participants with a range of demographic and disease features. An initial conceptual framework informed interview prompts and cues. Interviews elicited GC-related physical and psychological symptoms and salient aspects of HRQoL in relation to GC therapy. Interview data were analysed inductively to develop initial individual themes and domains. Candidate questionnaire items were developed and refined. RESULTS: Sixty semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted (UK n = 34, USA n = 10, Australia n = 16). The mean age was 58 years; 39/60 were female; and 18 rheumatic diseases were represented. Some 126 individual themes were identified and organized into six domains: physical symptoms; psychological symptoms; psychological impact of steroids; impact of steroids on participation; impact of steroids on relationships; and benefits of steroids. Candidate questionnaire items were tested and refined by piloting with patient research partners, iterative rounds of cognitive interviews and linguistic translatability assessment, informing a draft questionnaire. CONCLUSION: We describe an international qualitative study to develop candidate items for a treatment-specific PROM for patients with rheumatic diseases. A future survey will enable the validation of a final version of the PROM.

Health professionals' perspectives on psychological distress and meeting patients' support needs in rheumatology care settings: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs) face challenges including pain, fatigue and disease flares. Evidence suggests their levels of anxiety and depression are higher compared to the general population. Rheumatology teams report psychologically distressed patients have additional support needs and require more clinical time. Little is currently known about models of support and their integration into care pathways. AIM: To understand rheumatology health professionals' perspectives on patients' psychological distress and ways to meet support needs. METHODS: The study used a qualitative design, with data collected in telephone semi-structured interviews. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Fifteen interviews were conducted. Two main themes with sub-themes represent the data: Theme 1: 'No one shoe fits all'-the many manifestations of distress in patients (sub-themes: recognising distress, dealing with distress, dealing with life events alongside an IRD) and Theme 2: 'If rheumatology could be interwoven with psychological principles'-the need to attend to the psychological impact of IRDs, alongside the physical impact (sub-themes: priority given to physical health, working together to help patients in distress, how should patient distress be measured?, the need for extra time and resources). CONCLUSION: Distress can be obvious or hidden, cause issues for patients and health professionals and lead to poor engagement with care provision. Health professionals described the powerful link between physical and mental distress. This study suggests psychological support provision should be embedded within the rheumatology team and that patients' emotional wellbeing should be given equal priority to their physical wellbeing.

2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR Classification Criteria for Takayasu Arteritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate new classification criteria for Takayasu arteritis (TAK). METHODS: Patients with vasculitis or comparator diseases were recruited into an international cohort. The study proceeded in 6 phases: 1) identification of candidate criteria items, 2) collection of candidate items present at diagnosis, 3) expert panel review of cases, 4) data-driven reduction of candidate items, 5) derivation of a points-based classification score in a development data set, and 6) validation in an independent data set. RESULTS: The development data set consisted of 316 cases of TAK and 323 comparators. The validation data set consisted of an additional 146 cases of TAK and 127 comparators. Age ≤60 years at diagnosis and imaging evidence of large-vessel vasculitis were absolute requirements to classify a patient as having TAK. The final criteria items and weights were as follows: female sex (+1), angina (+2), limb claudication (+2), arterial bruit (+2), reduced upper extremity pulse (+2), reduced pulse or tenderness of a carotid artery (+2), blood pressure difference between arms of ≥20 mm Hg (+1), number of affected arterial territories (+1 to +3), paired artery involvement (+1), and abdominal aorta plus renal or mesenteric involvement (+3). A patient could be classified as having TAK with a cumulative score of ≥5 points. When these criteria were tested in the validation data set, the model area under the curve was 0.97 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.94-0.99) with a sensitivity of 93.8% (95% CI 88.6-97.1%) and specificity of 99.2% (95% CI 96.7-100.0%). CONCLUSION: The 2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR classification criteria for TAK are now validated for use in research.

2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR Classification Criteria for Giant Cell Arteritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate updated classification criteria for giant cell arteritis (GCA). METHODS: Patients with vasculitis or comparator diseases were recruited into an international cohort. The study proceeded in 6 phases: 1) identification of candidate items, 2) prospective collection of candidate items present at the time of diagnosis, 3) expert panel review of cases, 4) data-driven reduction of candidate items, 5) derivation of a points-based risk classification score in a development data set, and 6) validation in an independent data set. RESULTS: The development data set consisted of 518 cases of GCA and 536 comparators. The validation data set consisted of 238 cases of GCA and 213 comparators. Age ≥50 years at diagnosis was an absolute requirement for classification. The final criteria items and weights were as follows: positive temporal artery biopsy or temporal artery halo sign on ultrasound (+5); erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥50 mm/hour or C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/liter (+3); sudden visual loss (+3); morning stiffness in shoulders or neck, jaw or tongue claudication, new temporal headache, scalp tenderness, temporal artery abnormality on vascular examination, bilateral axillary involvement on imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography activity throughout the aorta (+2 each). A patient could be classified as having GCA with a cumulative score of ≥6 points. When these criteria were tested in the validation data set, the model area under the curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.88-0.94) with a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% CI 82.0-91.0%) and specificity of 94.8% (95% CI 91.0-97.4%). CONCLUSION: The 2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR GCA classification criteria are now validated for use in clinical research.

2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR classification criteria for Takayasu arteritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate new classification criteria for Takayasu arteritis (TAK). METHODS: Patients with vasculitis or comparator diseases were recruited into an international cohort. The study proceeded in six phases: (1) identification of candidate criteria items, (2) collection of candidate items present at diagnosis, (3) expert panel review of cases, (4) data-driven reduction of candidate items, (5) derivation of a points-based classification score in a development data set and (6) validation in an independent data set. RESULTS: The development data set consisted of 316 cases of TAK and 323 comparators. The validation data set consisted of an additional 146 cases of TAK and 127 comparators. Age ≤60 years at diagnosis and imaging evidence of large-vessel vasculitis were absolute requirements to classify a patient as having TAK. The final criteria items and weights were as follows: female sex (+1), angina (+2), limb claudication (+2), arterial bruit (+2), reduced upper extremity pulse (+2), reduced pulse or tenderness of a carotid artery (+2), blood pressure difference between arms of ≥20 mm Hg (+1), number of affected arterial territories (+1 to +3), paired artery involvement (+1) and abdominal aorta plus renal or mesenteric involvement (+3). A patient could be classified as having TAK with a cumulative score of ≥5 points. When these criteria were tested in the validation data set, the model area under the curve was 0.97 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.99) with a sensitivity of 93.8% (95% CI 88.6% to 97.1%) and specificity of 99.2% (95% CI 96.7% to 100.0%). CONCLUSION: The 2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR classification criteria for TAK are now validated for use in research.

2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR classification criteria for giant cell arteritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate updated classification criteria for giant cell arteritis (GCA). METHODS: Patients with vasculitis or comparator diseases were recruited into an international cohort. The study proceeded in six phases: (1) identification of candidate items, (2) prospective collection of candidate items present at the time of diagnosis, (3) expert panel review of cases, (4) data-driven reduction of candidate items, (5) derivation of a points-based risk classification score in a development data set and (6) validation in an independent data set. RESULTS: The development data set consisted of 518 cases of GCA and 536 comparators. The validation data set consisted of 238 cases of GCA and 213 comparators. Age ≥50 years at diagnosis was an absolute requirement for classification. The final criteria items and weights were as follows: positive temporal artery biopsy or temporal artery halo sign on ultrasound (+5); erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥50 mm/hour or C reactive protein ≥10 mg/L (+3); sudden visual loss (+3); morning stiffness in shoulders or neck, jaw or tongue claudication, new temporal headache, scalp tenderness, temporal artery abnormality on vascular examination, bilateral axillary involvement on imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography activity throughout the aorta (+2 each). A patient could be classified as having GCA with a cumulative score of ≥6 points. When these criteria were tested in the validation data set, the model area under the curve was 0.91 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.94) with a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% CI 82.0% to 91.0%) and specificity of 94.8% (95% CI 91.0% to 97.4%). CONCLUSION: The 2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR GCA classification criteria are now validated for use in clinical research.