Psychometric testing of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale in employed people with fibromyalgia.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to establish whether the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale (RA-WIS), in its current form, is applicable for use with employed people with fibromyalgia (FM) to identify the risk of work disability and need for work rehabilitation. METHODS: Content validity was first investigated using cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the RA-WIS and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale) and health (FM Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQ-R) scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 13 participants with FM. All RA-WIS items were considered very or extremely relevant by almost all participants, with only one suggesting other items (anxiety and brain fog). Questionnaire responses were analysed from 156 employed participants: 94% women; 45.71 (SD 10.05) years of age; with time since FM diagnosis 2.99 (4.17) years (symptom duration 8.36 (SD 7.16) years). The RA-WIS mostly satisfied Rasch model requirements and a Rasch transformation scale was created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.55-0.66) with work scales and the FIQ-R. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in FM, not individual level use. Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficient (2, 1) = 0.90. DISCUSSION: The RA-WIS is valid and reliable for group use in employed people with FM. However, further work is needed to develop a WIS for individual use in FM.

Psychometric testing of the British-English Perceived Workplace Support Scale, Work Accommodations, Benefits, Policies and Practices Scale, and Work Transitions Index in four rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The aims were to validate linguistically British-English versions of the Perceived Workplace Support Scale (PWSS), Work Accommodations, Benefits, Policies and Practices Scale (WABPPS), and Work Transitions Index (WTI) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), osteoarthritis (OA) and fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: The three scales were adapted into British-English and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed postal questionnaires. Construct validity for the PWSS was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work, job strain and work-life balance scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.50 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.70 (SD 8.00) years. The PWSS satisfied Rasch model requirements. Concurrent validity was mostly as hypothesised, that is, weak to moderate negative correlations for the PWSS (rs  = 0.07 to -0.61), and weak to moderate positive correlations for the WABPPS and WTI (rs  = 0.20-0.52). Some correlations were stronger, mostly in axSpA. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for all three scales was consistent with group use in all conditions. Test-retest reliability was generally excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80-0.93 for the three scales in the four conditions. DISCUSSION: Reliable, valid versions of the British-English PWSS, WABPPS, and WTI are now available for use in research, organisational level studies and vocational rehabilitation.

Psychometric testing of the British-English Long-Term Conditions Job Strain Scale, Long-Term Conditions Work Spillover Scale and Work-Health-Personal Life Perceptions Scale in four rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The aims were to validate linguistically British-English versions of the Long-Term Conditions Job Strain Scale (LTCJSS), Long-Term Conditions Work Spillover Scale (LTCWSS) and Work-Health-Personal Life Perceptions Scale (WHPLPS) in rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: The three scales were forward translated and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale [WALS]) and condition-specific health scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.5 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.7 (SD 8.0) years. The LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 satisfied Rasch model requirements, but Part 3 did not. A Rasch transformation scale and Reference Metric equating scales with the WALS were created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.41-0.85) for the three scales, except the WHPLPS Part 3. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in all conditions, and individual use except for the LTCWSS and WHPLSP Parts 1 and 2 in FM. Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80-0.96 for the three scales in the four conditions. DISCUSSION: Reliable, valid versions of the British-English LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 are now available for use in the UK.

EULAR points to consider for the management of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) points to consider (PtCs) for the management of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA). METHODS: An EULAR Task Force was established comprising 34 individuals: 26 rheumatologists, patient partners and rheumatology experienced health professionals. Two systematic literature reviews addressed clinical questions around diagnostic challenges, and pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies in D2T RA. PtCs were formulated based on the identified evidence and expert opinion. Strength of recommendations (SoR, scale A-D: A typically consistent level 1 studies and D level 5 evidence or inconsistent studies) and level of agreement (LoA, scale 0-10: 0 completely disagree and 10 completely agree) of the PtCs were determined by the Task Force members. RESULTS: Two overarching principles and 11 PtCs were defined concerning diagnostic confirmation of RA, evaluation of inflammatory disease activity, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, treatment adherence, functional disability, pain, fatigue, goal setting and self-efficacy and the impact of comorbidities. The SoR varied from level C to level D. The mean LoA with the overarching principles and PtCs was generally high (8.4-9.6). CONCLUSIONS: These PtCs for D2T RA can serve as a clinical roadmap to support healthcare professionals and patients to deliver holistic management and more personalised pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic strategies. High-quality evidence was scarce. A research agenda was created to guide future research.