Systematic Review of the Evaluation of Foster Care Programs.

OBJETIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct an exhaustive synthesis to determine which instruments and variables are most appropriate to evaluate foster care programs (foster, kinship, and professional families). This evaluation includes the children, their foster families, their families of origin, professionals, and foster care technicians. METHOD: The systematic review included randomized, quasi-randomized, longitudinal, and control group studies aimed at evaluating foster care interventions. RESULTS: A total of 86 studies, 138 assessment instruments, 18 constructs, and 73 independent research teams were identified. CONCLUSIONS: (1) although the object of the evaluations was the children, the informants were usually the people in charge of their care; therefore, effort should be made to involve the children in a more participatory way; (2) psychosocial functioning, behavior, and parenting are transversal elements in most evaluations, while quality of life and coping are not sufficiently well incorporated; (3) practical instruments (brief and easy to apply and correct) that are widely used and carry scientific guarantees should be prioritized to ensure the comparability and reliability of the conclusions; and (4) progress should be made in the study of evaluation models for all forms of foster care, including foster, extended, and specialized families.

OBJETIVO: El objetivo es realizar una síntesis exhaustiva que contribuya a determinar qué instrumentos y variables son las más adecuadas para evaluar programas de acogimiento familiar (familias extensas, ajenas y profesionalizadas), incluyendo en esta evaluación a los niños, sus familias acogedoras, sus familias de origen y a los profesionales y técnicos del acogimiento familiar. Método: La revisión sistemática incluyó estudios aleatorizados, cuasialeatorizados, longitudinales y con grupo control dirigidos a evaluar intervenciones de acogimiento familiar. RESULTADOS: Se identificaron 86 estudios, 138 instrumentos de evaluación, 18 constructos y 73 equipos de investigación independientes. CONCLUSIONES: (1) aunque el objeto de las evaluaciones sean los niños, habitualmente los informantes son las personas a cargo de sus cuidados, con lo que se debe hacer un esfuerzo por involucrarlos de forma más participativa; (2) el funcionamiento psicosocial, el comportamiento o la parentalidad son elementos transversales en la mayor parte de evaluaciones, sin embargo la calidad de vida y el afrontamiento no están suficientemente bien incorporados; (3) deben priorizarse instrumentos prácticos (breves y fáciles de aplicar y corregir), de amplio uso y con garantías científicas para asegurar la comparabilidad y fiabilidad de las conclusiones; (4) debe avanzarse en la investigación de modelos de evaluación en todas las modalidades de acogimiento familiar, ya sea en familias ajenas, extensas o especializadas.

SER recommendations on treatment of refractory Behçet's syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To develop multidisciplinary recommendations based on available evidence and expert consensus for the therapeutic management of patients with refractory Behçet's syndrome (BS) (difficult to treat, severe resistant, severe relapse) to conventional treatment. METHODS: A group of experts identified clinical research questions relevant to the objective of the document. These questions were reformulated in PICO format (patient, intervention, comparison and outcome). Systematic reviews of the evidence were conducted, the quality of the evidence was evaluated following the methodology of the international working group Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). After that, the multidisciplinary panel formulated the specific recommendations. RESULTS: 4 PICO questions were selected regarding the efficacy and safety of systemic pharmacological treatments in patients with BS with clinical manifestations refractory to conventional therapy related to mucocutaneous and/or articular, vascular, neurological parenchymal and gastrointestinal phenotypes. A total of 7 recommendations were made, structured by question, based on the identified evidence and expert consensus. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of most severe clinical manifestations of BS lacks solid scientific evidence and, besides, there are no specific recommendation documents for patients with refractory disease. With the aim of providing a response to this need, here we present the first official Recommendations of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology for the management of these patients. They are devised as a tool for assistance in clinical decision making, therapeutic homogenisation and to reduce variability in the care of these patients.

Development of a web tool to calculate the cumulative dose of glucocorticoids.

INTRODUCTION: Glucocorticoids are associated with serious side effects related to dosing and time of use. Unfortunately, there is no standard method for determining glucocorticoid exposure, especially in patients undergoing long-term treatment. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to create a free and easy-to-use web application to calculate, in a systematic way, the total cumulative dose of corticosteroids. METHODS: The total cumulative dose is calculated as the sum of all periods of treatment with different doses of corticosteroids, and is expressed as the equivalent dose of prednisone in mg. Glucocorticoid doses during periods in which the available information is missing or incomplete are estimated by systematic assumptions. RESULTS: A simulation exercise using standard patterns of steroid use in polymyalgia rheumatica, and giant cell arteritis showed that even when the period of no information reached 50% of the time, the accuracy of the calculator had a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE)<7%. CONCLUSION: This tool simplifies and standardizes the glucocorticoids cumulative dose calculation, thereby minimizing bias in the assessment of glucocorticoid cumulative dose.

Screening of interstitial lung disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review.

AIMS: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is frequent in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The aim of this review was to identify the different screening methods for ILD in patients with RA. METHODS: We ran a systematic search in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library up to April 2020 and did a hand search of the references of the retrieved articles. The search was limited to humans and articles published in English, Spanish or French. We selected studies with any design where: (a) the population included adult patients with RA; (b) the intervention was any screening method for ILD; and (c) validity or reliability of the screening method were evaluated, or a screening method was described. Two reviewers independently screened the articles by title and abstract and subsequently extracted the information using a specific data extraction form. RESULTS: 25 studies were included with a total of 2593 patients. The most frequently used tool for ILD screening was high resolution computed tomography (HRCT) of the lung. Electronic auscultation, biochemical markers, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and lung ultrasonography were also evaluated. Across the different studies, electronic auscultation and lung ultrasonography achieved higher accuracy than PFTs, BAL and biochemical markers. CONCLUSIONS: HRCT resulted as the most sensitive tool for ILD screening in patients with RA. Given its harmlessness and high sensitivity, lung ultrasonography may become the first-choice tool in the future.

Valve Abnormalities, Risk Factors for Heart Valve Disease and Valve Replacement Surgery in Spondyloarthritis. A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Objective: Evaluate the evidence on the abnormalities of the aortic root and heart valves, risk and prognostic factors for heart valve disease and valve replacement surgery in spondyloarthritis. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed using Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases until July 2021. Prevalence, incidence, risk and prognostic factors for heart valve disease; dimension, morphology, and pathological abnormalities of the valves were analyzed. Patient characteristics (younger age, history of cardiac disease or longer disease duration) and period of realization were considered for the analysis. The SIGN Approach was used for rating the quality of the evidence of the studies. Results: In total, 37 out of 555 studies were included. Overall, the level of evidence was low. The incidence of aortic insufficiency was 2.5-3.9‰. Hazard Ratio for aortic insufficiency was 1.8-2.0. Relative risk for aortic valve replacement surgery in ankylosing spondylitis patients was 1.22-1.46. Odds ratio for aortic insufficiency was 1.07 for age and 1.05 for disease duration. Mitral valve abnormalities described were mitral valve prolapse, calcification, and thickening. Aortic valve abnormalities described were calcification, thickening and an echocardiographic "subaortic bump." Abnormalities of the aorta described were thickening of the wall and aortic root dilatation. The most common microscopic findings were scarring of the adventitia, lymphocytic infiltration, and intimal proliferation. Conclusions: A higher prevalence and risk of aortic valve disease is observed in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Studies were heterogeneous and analysis was not adjusted by potential confounders. Most studies did not define accurate outcomes and may have detected small effects as being statistically significant.

Recommendations by the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on the Use of Biological Therapies in Axial Spondyloarthritis. / Recomendaciones de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología sobre el uso de terapias biológicas en espondiloartritis axial.

OBJECTIVE: Recent data published on biological therapy in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) since the last publication of the recommendations of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SER) has led to the generation of a review of these recommendations based on the best possible evidence. These recommendations should be a reference for rheumatologists and those involved in the treatment of patients with axSpA. METHODS: Recommendations were drawn up following a nominal group methodology and based on systematic reviews. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were classified according to the model proposed by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford. The level of agreement was established through the Delphi technique. RESULTS: In this review, we did an update of the evaluation of disease activity and treatment objectives. We included the new drugs with approved therapeutic indication for axSpA. We reviewed both the predictive factors of the therapeutic response and progression of radiographic damage. Finally, we drafted some recommendations for the treatment of patients refractory to anti-tumor necrosis factor, as well as for the possible optimization of biological therapy. The document also includes a table of recommendations and a treatment algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: We present an update of the SER recommendations for the use of biological therapy in patients with axSpA.