Self-medication with analgesics reported by patients with ulcerative colitis: An anonymous survey.

INTRODUCTION: Analgesics are widely used, but evidence regarding whether their use increases the risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) flares or complications is unclear. Therefore, self-medication with analgesics in IBD is usually not recommended. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of self-medication with analgesics in a cohort of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients and to identify reasons and factors associated with self-medication. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included consecutive unselected adult patients with UC. Participants were asked to complete an anonymous web-based survey with multiple-choice questions and closed responses. No clinical data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 546 patients (61.2% women, mean age 39.9 years) completed the survey. The prevalence of self-medication with analgesics was 49.8% (272/546). Paracetamol (45.2%) and metamizole (21.2%) were the most frequently used drugs; frequencies of self-medication were <5% for other analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids). The most frequent reasons for self-medication were the need for quick symptom relief and that it had been agreed with/prescribed by the treating physician. Multivariable analysis identified female sex (odds ratio [OR]=1.9), sick leave (OR=2.2), treatment with intravenous drugs (OR=2.9), and emergency room visit (OR=2.3) as variables associated with self-medication, whilst follow-up by a nurse was associated with less self-medication (OR=0.6). CONCLUSION: The frequency of self-medication with analgesics in UC patients is high and appears to be associated with variables suggesting worse disease control. Closer follow-up, including a specialized nurse, could decrease self-medication. Strategies to improve disease control, including close monitoring of symptoms such as pain, are needed.

Abatacept in monotherapy vs combined in interstitial lung disease of rheumatoid arthritis-multicentre study of 263 Caucasian patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of abatacept (ABA) in monotherapy (ABAMONO) vs combined ABA [ABA plus MTX (ABAMTX) or ABA plus non-MTX conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) (ABANON-MTX)] in RA patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) (RA-ILD). METHODS: This was a restrospective multicentre study of RA-ILD Caucasian patients treated with ABA. We analysed in the three groups (ABAMONO, ABAMTX, ABANON-MTX) the following outcome variables: (i) dyspnoea; (ii) forced vital capacity (FVC) and diffusion capacity of the lung for the carbon monoxide (DLCO); (iii) chest high-resolution CT (HRCT); (iv) DAS28-ESR; (v) CS-sparing effect; and (vi) ABA retention and side-effects. Differences between basal and final follow-up were evaluated. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the differences between the three groups. RESULTS: We studied 263 RA-ILD patients (mean ± s.d. age 64.6 ± 10 years) [ABAMONO (n = 111), ABAMTX (n = 46) and ABANON-MTX (n = 106)]. At baseline, ABAMONO patients were older (67 ± 10 years) and took higher prednisone dose [10 (interquartile range 5-15) mg/day]. At that time, there were no statistically significant differences in sex, seropositivity, ILD patterns, FVC and DLCO, or disease duration. Following treatment, in all groups, most patients experienced stabilization or improvement in FVC, DLCO, dyspnoea and chest HRCT as well as improvement in DAS28-ESR. A statistically significant difference between basal and final follow-up was only found in CS-sparing effect in the group on combined ABA (ABAMTX or ABANON-MTX). However, in the multivariable analysis, there were no differences in any outcome variables between the three groups. CONCLUSION: In Caucasian individuals with RA-ILD, ABA in monotherapy or combined with MTX or with other conventional-DMARDs seems to be equally effective and safe. However, a CS-sparing effect is only observed with combined ABA.

A Survey of Physicians' Perception of the Use and Effectiveness of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures in Chronic Cough Patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to understand the perception of family physicians, pulmonologists, and allergists with respect to diagnostic tests performed on patients with chronic cough and treatments prescribed to patients with refractory or unexplained chronic cough. We also assessed how these health professionals perceived the effectiveness of these treatments. METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed by the scientific societies SEPAR, SEAIC, SEMERGEN, semFYC, and SEMG. Respondents were asked how often they perform diagnostic tests and prescribe treatments (responses from 1 = never to 10 = always) and how they perceived the effectiveness of the drugs used (from 1 = not at all to 10 = very effective). The correlation between perceived effectiveness and frequency of prescription was analyzed. RESULTS: The respondents comprised 620 family physicians, 92 pulmonologists, and 62 allergists. The most frequently performed diagnostic tests were chest x-ray and, among pulmonologists and allergists, simple spirometry and bronchodilator tests. The most frequently prescribed drugs were bronchodilators (percentages scoring 8-10 for each specialty: 43.2%, 42.4%, and 56.5%; p = 0.127), inhaled corticosteroids (36.9%, 55.4%, and 54.8%; p < 0.001), and antitussives (family physicians, 33.4%). Regarding perceived effectiveness, only bronchodilators, inhaled or oral corticosteroids, and opioids obtained a median effectiveness score > 5 (between 6 and 7). Correlation coefficients (ρ2) suggested that approximately 45% of prescription was related to perceived effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Although chronic cough is a common problem, diagnosis and treatment differ among specialists. The perceived effectiveness of drugs is generally low.

The Experience With Health Care of Patients With Inflammatory Arthritis: A Cross-sectional Survey Using the Instrument to Evaluate the Experience of Patients With Chronic Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Patients' experience with health care is becoming a key component for the provision of a patient-centered health care model. The aim of this study was to assess the experience with health care of patients with inflammatory arthritis and patient- and health care-related factors. METHODS: Patients responded to an anonymous survey provided by their treating clinical teams. The survey comprised the validated 12-item IEXPAC (Instrument to Evaluate the EXperience of PAtients with Chronic diseases) tool and demographic variables and health care-related characteristics that may affect patients' experience. RESULTS: A total of 359 of 625 surveys were returned (response rate, 57.4%). Overall, patient responses were positive (>60% gave "always/mostly" answers) for statements assessing the interaction between patients and health care professionals or patient self-management following health care professional guidance. However, positive patient responses for items regarding patient interaction with the health care system via the internet or with other patients were less than 13%. Only 25.6% of patients who had been hospitalized reported receiving a follow-up call or visit following discharge. In the bivariate analysis, experience scores were higher (better experience) in men, those seen by fewer specialists or by the same physician, and in patients treated with a fewer number of drugs or with subcutaneous/intravenous drugs. Multivariate analyses identified regular follow-up by the same physician and treatment with subcutaneous/intravenous drugs as variables associated with a better patient experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies areas of care for patients with inflammatory arthritis with the potential to improve patients' experience and highlights the importance of patient-physician relationships and comprehensive patient care.

The beliefs of rheumatoid arthritis patients in their subcutaneous biological drug: strengths and areas of concern.

Patients' beliefs about their prescribed medication are an important factor influencing intentional non-adherence. This study describes rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients' beliefs about their subcutaneous (SC) biological medication through the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ), and potential associations. As part of the ARCO study (Study on Adherence of Rheumatoid arthritis patients to subCutaneous and Oral drugs), patients completed the BMQ specifically for their SC biological medication, encompassing a necessity and a concerns scale. The medication possession ratio (MPR) was calculated to assess adherence to the SC biological medication. The BMQ was completed by 321 patients. Between 71.0 and 89.7% of patients agreed/strongly agreed with necessity scale statements, and only 7.2% had low necessity scores. Between 20.0 and 49.8% of patients agreed/strongly agreed with four of five concern scale statements, and 72.3% agreed/strongly agreed with the concern statement regarding long-term medication effects. The percentage with high concerns was 58.9%, and was higher in patients not satisfied with, or with less fulfillment of, tolerability expectations. Non-adherence percentages were, respectively, 13.8 and 13.0% (p = 0.919) in those with high or low necessity, and 16.0 and 10.6% (p = 0.171) in those with high or low concerns. Most patients were categorized as 'ambivalent' (58.5%; high necessity/high concerns) or 'accepting' (36.1%; high necessity/low concerns) of their SC biological medication. The BMQ identified patients' concerns with their SC biological medication. Because patients' concerns could influence non-adherence to medication and future outcomes, physicians should address this issue in the clinic by informing patients and setting clear expectations.

Correction to: The beliefs of rheumatoid arthritis patients in their subcutaneous biological drug: strengths and areas of concern.

In the original publication, the family name of the last author was incorrect. The correct name should read as Jaime Calvo-Alén.

Non-adherence to subcutaneous biological medication in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicentre, non-interventional study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate non-adherence to prescribed subcutaneous biologicals in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in Spain. METHODS: ARCO (Study on Adherence of Rheumatoid Arthritis patients to SubCutaneous and Oral Drugs) was a multicentre, non-interventional retrospective study involving 42 rheumatology clinics from representative hospitals throughout Spain. The primary objective was to assess the percentage of patients (aged ≥18 years with an established RA diagnosis) with non-adherence to prescribed subcutaneous biologicals using clinical records and hospital pharmacy dispensing logs as the primary information sources. Adherence was assessed using the Medication Possession Ratio (MPR). Additionally, patients completed the Morisky-Green Medication Adherence Questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients (77.5% females, mean age 54.9 years, median RA duration since diagnosis 7.8 years) were enrolled in ARCO. Non-adherence (MPR ≤80%) was reported in 52/363 evaluable patients (14.3%), and was lower in patients receiving initial monthly drug administration (6.4%) than with weekly (17.4%; p=0.034) or every two weeks (14.4%; p=0.102) administration. By multivariate analysis, non-adherence was positively associated with RA duration above the median and with using induction doses. Monthly administration, compared to weekly administration, was inversely associated with non-adherence. Age, gender, order of administration, and changes in the interval of administration, showed no association with non-adherence. Compared with the MPR, the Morisky-Green questionnaire performed poorly in detecting non-adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Non-adherence to the prescribed subcutaneous biological drug occurred in 14.3% of patients with RA. Patients using the most convenient administration period (i.e. monthly) had better adherence than those using more frequent dosing schedules.

Muscular dystrophy in the Japanese Spitz: an inversion disrupts the DMD and RPGR genes.

An X-linked muscular dystrophy, with deficiency of full-length dystrophin and expression of a low molecular weight dystrophin-related protein, has been described in Japanese Spitz dogs. The aim of this study was to identify the causative mutation and develop a specific test to identify affected cases and carrier animals. Gene expression studies in skeletal muscle of an affected animal indicated aberrant expression of the Duchenne muscular dystrophy (dystrophin) gene and an anomaly in intron 19 of the gene. Genome-walking experiments revealed an inversion that interrupts two genes on the X chromosome, the Duchenne muscular dystrophy gene and the retinitis pigmentosa GTPase regulator gene. All clinically affected dogs and obligate carriers that were tested had the mutant chromosome, and it is concluded that the inversion is the causative mutation for X-linked muscular dystrophy in the Japanese Spitz breed. A PCR assay that amplifies mutant and wild-type alleles was developed and proved capable of identifying affected and carrier individuals. Unexpectedly, a 7-year-old male animal, which had not previously come to clinical attention, was shown to possess the mutant allele and to have a relatively mild form of the disease. This observation indicates phenotypic heterogeneity in Japanese Spitz muscular dystrophy, a feature described previously in humans and Golden Retrievers. With the availability of a simple, fast and accurate test for Japanese Spitz muscular dystrophy, detection of carrier animals and selected breeding should help eliminate the mutation from the breed.

Association between use of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and postoperative complications after gastric surgery for cancer (POWER 4): a nationwide, prospective multicentre study.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols in gastric cancer surgery remains controversial. METHODS: Multicentre prospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer. Adherence with 22 individual components of ERAS pathways were assessed in all patients, regardless of whether they were treated in a self-designed ERAS centre. Each centre had a three-month recruitment period between October 2019 and September 2020. The primary outcome was moderate-to-severe postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were overall postoperative complications, adherence to the ERAS pathway, 30 day-mortality and hospital length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 743 patients in 72 Spanish hospitals were included, 211 of them (28.4 %) from self-declared ERAS centres. A total of 245 patients (33 %) experienced postoperative complications, graded as moderate-to-severe complications in 172 patients (23.1 %). There were no differences in the incidence of moderate-to-severe complications (22.3% vs. 23.5%; OR, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.59 to 1.41); P = 0.068), or overall postoperative complications between the self-declared ERAS and non-ERAS groups (33.6% vs. 32.7%; OR, 1.05 (95 % CI, 0.70 to 1.56); P = 0.825). The overall rate of adherence to the ERAS pathway was 52% [IQR 45 to 60]. There were no differences in postoperative outcomes between higher (Q1, > 60 %) and lower (Q4, ≤ 45 %) ERAS adherence quartiles. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the partial application of perioperative ERAS measures nor treatment in self-designated ERAS centres improved postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing gastric surgery for cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03865810.

Self-medication with oral corticosteroids reported by patients with ulcerative colitis: characteristics, reasons and patients' behaviors.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined self-medication with corticosteroids among patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). AIMS: To assess the frequency of self-medication with oral corticosteroids in UC patients, and associated factors and reasons. METHODS: An anonymous, voluntary, web-based survey was administered to adults with UC recruited via a Spanish patient association (ACCU) and hospital gastroenterology departments. Information was provided by patients; no clinical data were collected. Descriptive statistics and comparisons of frequencies are displayed. RESULTS: Among 546 respondents (mean age 39.9 years, median duration of UC since diagnosis 7 years,) 36 (6.6%) reported self-medication with oral corticosteroids during the past year (once: 23 patients; 2-3 times: 10 patients; >3 times: 3 patients). Self-medication was more common among patients managed in general gastroenterology vs. inflammatory bowel disease clinics [23 (9.0%) vs. 11 (2.9%), P = 0.019], patients with no regular follow-up [4 (22.2%) vs. 32 (6.1%), P = 0.026] and patients with more flares (P < 0.001). Patients who stored steroids from previous flares (17.9% vs. 6.0%, P < 0.001) or who lived with a partner taking steroids (9.3% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.038) were more likely to self-medicate than other patients. Common reasons for self-medicating included the need for quick symptom relief (55.6%), fear of worsening (47.2%) and difficulty in getting an appointment (25.0%). Only seven patients (19.4%) informed their physician when they started self-medicating and only four (11.1%) declared they would not start corticosteroids again. CONCLUSION: Self-medication with oral corticosteroids is not a common practice among patients with UC in Spain, but several areas of improvement exist.

Multicenter Study of Secukinumab Survival and Safety in Spondyloarthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis: SEcukinumab in Cantabria and ASTURias Study.

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the drug retention rate and safety of secukinumab (SEC) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in a real clinical setting. Methods: This multicenter retrospective observational study included all AxSpA and PsA patients who received at least one dose of SEC. Adverse events (AE) and the drug retention rate were the main study outcomes. Drug survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves while predictive factors of discontinuation were evaluated using a Cox regression analysis. The weight of these associations was estimated by hazard ratio (HR) values. Results: We included 154 patients (59 PsA and 95 AxSpA). Mean disease duration was 6.5 years (IQR 2-8). Sixty-one percent of patients were treated with two or more biologics prior to SEC. The 1 and 2-year retention rates for SEC were 66 and 43%, respectively. The main causes of discontinuation were inefficacy (59%) and AE (36%). The factors associated with lower risk of discontinuation were male gender (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.78 p = 0.001), obesity (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.93 p = 0.027), hypertension (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.30-0.93 p = 0.008), and diabetes (HR 0.42 95% CI 0.18-0.99 p = 0.047) while number of previous biologics and depression were predictors of discontinuation (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.34 p = 0.011 and HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.61-3.96 p < 0.001). Conclusions: SEC showed a good retention rate in a population previously exposed to several biological therapies. As a novelty, cardiometabolic comorbidities were associated with better drug survival.

Performance of the ASAS Health Index for the Evaluation of Spondyloarthritis in Daily Practice.

OBJECTIVE: The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index (ASAS HI) is a tool designed to assess disease impact in spondyloarthritis (SpA), but its clinical performance is barely known. We aimed to test the clinimetric properties of ASAS HI in a real clinical setting. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 111 consecutive patients with SpA. The measurement properties of ASAS HI were tested against conventional assessment measures. Convergent validity was assessed by Spearman rho correlations, while discriminative validity was analyzed through receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves. A multivariate regression analysis was designed to identify ASAS HI items associated with active disease. RESULTS: The average ASAS HI was 5.4 ± 3.8 (interquartile range 3-8). ASAS HI showed high convergent validity against other SpA measures (rho ≥ 0.70, p < 0.0005). The optimal criteria for detecting high/very high disease activity Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) categories was an ASAS HI score > 6, area under the ROC curve 0.86 (95% CI 0.78-0.92), positive likelihood ratio 7.3 (95% CI 3.1-17.1), p < 0.0001. The ASAS HI items significantly associated with Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index active disease were "I often get frustrated" (OR 9.2, 95% CI 1.2-69.4, p = 0.032), and "I sleep badly at night" (OR 7.7, 95% CI 1.4-41.6, p = 0.018). As for ASDAS, it was "pain sometimes disrupts my normal activities" (OR 8.7, 95% CI 1.7-45.2, p = 0.010). CONCLUSION: The ASAS HI is a useful and simple instrument for its application in daily practice. Given its good clinimetric properties, it could be used as an additional instrument to evaluate SpA.

Patients' perceptions on shared decision making during prescription of subcutaneous biological drug treatments for inflammatory arthritis: The RHEU-LIFE survey.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the preferences of patients with rheumatic diseases and their perceived experience regarding participation in shared decision making (SDM) when they were prescribed a subcutaneous (SC) biological drug. METHODS: A printed survey was handed to 1,000 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases treated with SC biological drug. The survey included closed questions about preferences regarding decision making and about patients' experience when they were prescribed an SC biological drug. Descriptive statistics were performed with stratification by patient profiles, using chi-square for comparisons between groups. RESULTS: A total of 592 surveys were received (response rate 59.2%, mean age 51.7 years, 57.6% women). Some 28.2% of patients reported preferring to take part in treatment selection, a percentage that was higher in younger patients, in those with higher academic degree and in those who search information in sources different to that of health care professionals. Over half of patients (56.3%) perceived that the rheumatologist considered their opinion when prescribing an SC biological drug, a percentage higher in younger people. Only in 40.8% of cases did the patients' preference match their perception of their participation in the process. No differences were observed by sex, disease or number of biologics. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases want information about their treatments but mostly leave the prescription decision to the rheumatologist. Younger people, or those with higher academic degree, more often want to participate in the SDM. There are discrepancies between patient preferences and perceptions of this process.

Perceptions of patients with rheumatic diseases treated with subcutaneous biologicals on their level of information: RHEU-LIFE Survey. / Percepciones de los pacientes con enfermedades reumáticas tratados con biológicos subcutáneos sobre su nivel de información. Encuesta RHEU-LIFE.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate, in Spanish patients with rheumatic diseases treated with subcutaneous biological drugs, their sources of information, which sources they consider most relevant, and their satisfaction with the information received in the hospital. METHODS: Rheumatologists from 50 hospitals handed out an anonymous survey to 20 consecutive patients with rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis or psoriatic arthritis treated with subcutaneous biologicals. The survey was developed ad hoc by 4 rheumatologists and 3 patients, and included questions with closed-ended responses on sources of information and satisfaction. RESULTS: The survey was handed-out to 1,000 patients, 592 of whom completed it (response rate: 59.2%). The rheumatologist was mentioned as the most important source of information (75%), followed by the primary care physician, nurses, and electronic resources; 45.2% received oral and written information about the biological, 46.1% oral only, and 6.0% written only; 8.7% stated that they had not been taught to inject the biological. The percentage of patients satisfied with the information received was high (87.2%), although the satisfaction was lower in relation to safety. If the information came from the rheumatologist, the satisfaction was higher (89.6%) than when coming from other sources (59.6%; P<.001). Satisfaction was also higher if the information was provided orally and written (92.8%) than if provided only orally (86.1%; P=.013); 45.2% reported having sought information from sources outside the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The rheumatologist is key in transmitting satisfactory information on biological treatment to patients. He or she must also act as a guide, since a high percentage of patients seeks information in other different sources.

Needle-induced paresthesiae during single-shot spinal anesthesia: a comparison of sitting versus lateral decubitus position.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Paresthesiae occasionally occur during spinal puncture or injection of local anesthetic for spinal anesthesia. No information is currently available regarding the effects of the patient's position on the incidence of needle-induced paresthesiae. The purpose of this prospective, observational study was to compare the occurrence of needle-induced paresthesiae in patients who received single-shot spinal anesthesia in the sitting position or in the lateral decubitus position. METHODS: A total of 620 patients operated on under spinal anesthesia were included. Spinal anesthesia was performed in the sitting position in 142 patients and in the lateral decubitus position in 478 patients. All blocks were performed with a 25-gauge, 90-mm, Sprotte needle, at the L3-L4 or L4-L5 level. Patients' demographics, patients' position (lateral decubitus or sitting), number of skin punctures, incidence of paresthesiae, and success of the anesthesia were recorded. RESULTS: The overall incidence of paresthesiae was higher in the lateral decubitus position (16.95%) compared with the sitting position (9.15%) (P = 0.0230). The number of punctures and the success rate were similar in both positions. Studying the incidence of paresthesiae for each position, when performing 1 or more punctures, there was no position-related difference noted if a single-needle puncture was sufficient to perform the block (8.0% in the lateral decubitus group versus 5.1% in the sitting group) (P = 0.3305). This difference between positions was significant when more than a single-needle puncture was required (34.1% in the lateral decubitus group versus 18.6% in the sitting group) (P = 0.0497). CONCLUSIONS: Patient's position may influence the occurrence of needle-induced paresthesiae during spinal anesthesia. Lateral decubitus position resulted in a higher incidence of paresthesiae than the sitting position. However, there is no position-related difference noted if a single-needle puncture is sufficient to perform the block.