The McMaster Toronto Arthritis patient preference questionnaire (MACTAR): a methodological study of reliability and minimal detectable change after a 6 week-period of acupuncture treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: The McMaster Toronto Arthritis patient preference questionnaire (MACTAR) is a semi-structured interview consisting of a baseline and a follow-up interview. The MACTAR baseline is reliable and valid, however the reliability of the MACTAR follow-up is scarcely described. The aim of this study was to describe aspects of reliability and ability to detect changes of the Swedish MACTAR follow-up following acupuncture treatment in individuals with rheumatoid arthritis. RESULTS: The study was of Single Subject Experimental Design, with a 2-week non-interventional A-phase and a 6-week intervention B-phase. Eight individuals with RA, age 30-68 years, were included. MACTAR baseline was performed once followed by five assessments with MACTAR follow-up during the A-phase and another ten assessments during the B-phase. Reliability statistics were calculated for measurements 1-3 during the A-phase and the ability to detect effects of acupuncture treatment was tested by celeration lines in the B-phase. The MACTAR follow-up was highly reliable (ICC = 0.7-0.9, SEM = 2.3-4.3, and SDD = 6.2-11.7). Visual and statistical analyses indicated that the MACTAR follow-up could detect effects on individual- and group levels after acupuncture treatment, indicating that the MACTAR follow-up seems to be reliable and is able to detect effects of acupuncture treatment in RA.

Disabilities of importance for patients to improve--using a patient preference tool in rheumatoid arthritis.

PURPOSE: To investigate, using the McMaster Toronto Arthritis patient preference disability questionnaire (MACTAR), disabilities most important to improve in Swedish patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to compare these with the pre-defined activities in the International Classification of Functioning (ICF) comprehensive core set for RA and the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Also to categorize patient preference selected disabilities using the ICF, to correlate the MACTAR score to RA core set measures and to evaluate the MACTAR's test-retest reliability. METHODS: 45 patients with RA (median (md) age 59 years, diagnosis duration md 10 years) were included. Assessments included disease activity score (DAS28), timed-stands test (TST), shoulder function assessment (SFA), visual analogue scale for pain (VAS), HAQ, patients' global assessment of well-being (PGA) and the MACTAR. RESULTS: 58 disabilities were identified of which 17 were identified by at least 5 patients. 47% of them were represented in the Comprehensive ICF RA core set and 53% in the HAQ. 16/17 were categorized in the ICF activities and participation component. Correlations between the MACTAR and other measures were: DAS28 (rs -0.65), TST (rs -0.19), SFA (rs 0.38), VAS (rs -0.61), HAQ (rs -0.51) and PGA (rs -0.61). Weighted κ was 0.59. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the disabilities patients with RA identified by use of the MACTAR are not evaluated in the Comprehensive ICF core set for RA or the HAQ. MACTAR has moderate test-retest reliability. MACTAR can be considered to be used in addition to traditional RA outcomes and may potentially improve clinical assessment of patients with RA. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: RA has an impact on personal life areas. The MACTAR helps identify individual disease-related disabilities of importance to improve. The MACTAR provides an opportunity for individualized goal-setting in rehabilitation and can thus promote adherence in rehabilitation. MACTAR may potentially improve clinical assessment for patients with RA.