Influence of Social Support, Financial Status, and Lifestyle on the Disparity Between Inflammation and Disability in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how social support, financial status, and lifestyle influence the development of excess disability in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data were obtained from the Étude et Suivi des Polyarthrites Indifférenciées Récentes (ESPOIR) cohort study of people with RA. A previous analysis identified groups with similar inflammation trajectories but markedly different disability over 10 years; those in the higher disability trajectory groups were defined as having "excess disability." Self-reported data regarding contextual factors (social support, financial situation, lifestyle) were obtained from participants, and they completed patient-reported outcome measures (pain, fatigue, anxiety, depression) at baseline. The direct effect of the contextual factors on excess disability and the effect mediated by patient-reported outcome measures were assessed using structural equation models. Findings were validated in 2 independent data sets (Norfolk Arthritis Register [NOAR], Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Network [ERAN]). RESULTS: Of 538 included ESPOIR participants (mean age ± SD 48.3 ± 12.2 years; 79.2% women), 200 participants (37.2%) were in the excess disability group. Less social support (ß = 0.17 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.08, 0.26]), worse financial situation (ß = 0.24 [95% CI 0.14, 0.34]), less exercise (ß = 0.17 [95% CI 0.09-0.25]), and less education (ß = 0.15 [95% CI 0.06, 0.23]) were associated with excess disability group membership; smoking, alcohol consumption, and body mass index were not. Fatigue and depression mediated a small proportion of these effects. Similar results were seen in NOAR and ERAN. CONCLUSION: Greater emphasis is needed on the economic and social contexts of individuals with RA at presentation; these factors might influence disability over the following decade.

Reduced cognitive ability in people with rheumatoid arthritis compared with age-matched healthy controls.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the cognitive ability of people with RA with healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: People with RA were recruited from the Norfolk Arthritis Register (NOAR), a population-based cohort study of people with inflammatory arthritis. Data on aged-matched HCs (people with no cognitive impairment) came from the comparison arm of The Dementia Research and Care Clinic Study (TRACC). People with RA and HCs performed a range of cognitive ability tasks to assess attention, memory, verbal fluency, language, visuospatial skills, emotional recognition, executive function and theory of mind. A score of <88 on the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III was considered cognitive impairment. Scores were compared using linear regression adjusting for age, sex, smoking status, education, BMI, anxiety and depression. RESULTS: Thirty-eight people with RA [mean (S.D.) age: 69.1 (8.0) years; 25 (65.8%) women] were matched with 28 HCs [mean (S.D.) age: 68.2 (6.4) years; 15 (53.6%) women]. Twenty-three (60.5%) people with RA were considered to have mild cognitive impairment [mean (S.D.) Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III: RA = 85.2 (7.4), HC = 96.0 (2.5)]. People with RA had impairments in memory, verbal fluency, visuospatial functioning, executive function and emotional recognition in faces compared with HCs, after adjustment for confounders. CONCLUSION: People with RA had cognitive impairments in a range of domains. People with RA might benefit from cognitive impairment screening to allow for early administration of appropriate interventions.

Predictors of and outcomes following orthopaedic joint surgery in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis followed for 20 years.

Objectives: To analyse predictors and outcomes of major orthopaedic surgery in a cohort of RA patients followed for 20 years. Methods: Patients were recruited to the Norfolk Arthritis Register from 1990 to 1994. Demographic and clinical variables (including the HAQ and swollen and tender joint counts) were assessed at baseline; the 2010 ACR/EULAR RA classification criteria were applied. Patients reported incident comorbidities and major orthopaedic joint surgery (replacement, synovectomy, fusion, excision) when reassessed at years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 15 and 20. Baseline and time-varying predictors of orthopaedic surgery were assessed using a conditional risk set model, a type of multiple-failure survival analysis. Change in disability after surgery was assessed using weighted mixed-effects linear regression. Results: Of 589 RA patients [median age 56 years (IQR 45-68); 66.7% women] recruited to the Norfolk Arthritis Register with at least one follow-up, 102 reported a total of 180 major surgeries, with hip replacement being the most common (n = 68/180). Patients reporting major surgery had worse functional disability at all time points, but similar swollen/tender joint counts to those without major surgery. Each unit increase in HAQ score was associated with a doubling of the patient's risk of having surgery by the next assessment [hazard ratio 2.11 per unit increase in HAQ (95% CI 1.64, 2.71)]. Patients had worse HAQ scores after surgery than patients not undergoing surgery [ß = 0.17 (95% CI 0.03, 0.32)]. Conclusion: HAQ was the strongest predictor of future major surgery. This supports the argument that HAQ should be included in routine clinical assessment.