The viability and necessity of APRN-led care models in the clinical management of haemophilia and other inherited bleeding and clotting disorders.

A growing and ageing haemophilia treatment centre (HTC) population, as well as a glaring shortage of adult haematologists available for the clinical management of persons with haemophilia (PWH), has resulted in significant care gaps in the United States. In response, various advanced practice registered nurse (APRN)-based models have been adopted across the country to counteract a deficit in haematologist resources for adult PWH. These models in the management of PWH have demonstrated competency and efficiency in the care of patients with haemophilia, offering a viable solution in areas where haematologist resources are limited and assure quality care provision, most notably in rural areas. The available literature indicates equivalence in terms of clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction and elements of healthcare service utilization. With continued support in current clinical guidelines and institutional contributions in the form of residency and fellowship programmes, the robust successes of APRN models for the clinical management of PWH can be maintained and expanded well into the foreseeable future.

Core outcome set for gene therapy in haemophilia: Results of the coreHEM multistakeholder project.

BACKGROUND: Gene therapy trial results show potential to cure haemophilia A and haemophilia B. Securing broad access to a cure for a lifelong chronic disease is anticipated to face barriers at the individual and healthcare system levels, which can be partly mitigated by harmonized planning of clinical research studies. The aim of the coreHEM project was to determine the set of outcome measures required to evaluate efficacy, safety, comparative effectiveness and value of gene therapy for haemophilia. METHODS: Modified Delphi consensus process, based on methods adapted from the COMET Initiative. RESULTS: Forty-nine participants (five patients, five clinicians, five researchers, four regulators, three research agencies, six health technology assessors, nine payers and 12 drug developers) took part in the study, with over 90% participation. The frequency of bleeds, factor activity level, duration of expression, chronic pain, healthcare resource use and mental health were identified as the core outcomes to be measured in addition to regulatory-mandated adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time in haemophilia, a core outcome set has been developed, with the involvement of representatives of all relevant stakeholder groups. The core set has been expanded to include outcomes supporting assessment of comparative effectiveness and value, with the goal of streamlining regulatory approval, health technology assessment and market access decisions. Patient involvement ensures that outcomes are meaningful and relevant to those living with haemophilia. Active dialogue among drug developers, regulators and payers throughout the process is expected to facilitate broad uptake of the core outcomes in forthcoming clinical trials.

Impact of pain and functional impairment in US adults with haemophilia: Patient-reported outcomes and musculoskeletal evaluation in the pain, functional impairment and quality of life (P-FiQ) study.

INTRODUCTION: Standardized and disease-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments assessing pain, functional impairment and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with haemophilia (PWH) have been used in studies, but infrequently in comprehensive care settings for individual assessment or treatment planning. AIM: To assess the impact of pain and functional impairment on HRQoL in PWH. METHODS: P-FiQ enrolled 381 adult PWH with a history of joint pain/bleeding and included 5 PROs and a clinical joint evaluation (Hemophilia Joint Health Score v2.1 [HJHS]). RESULTS: Median age was 34 years; 49.9% reported a history of joint procedure or surgery. On EQ-5D-5L, most reported problems with mobility (61.4%), usual activities (53.2%) and pain/discomfort (76.1%). On Brief Pain Inventory v2 Short Form, median worst pain (range 0-10) was 6, least pain 1, average pain 3 and current pain 2. Ankles were most frequently reported as the most painful joints (37.4%), followed by knees (23.7%) and elbows (18.9%). On International Physical Activity Questionnaire, 51% reported no activity in the prior week. On SF-36v2 health survey, median subscores were worse for 4 physical health domains vs 4 mental health domains. Among Hemophilia Activities List domains (range 0 [worst]-100 [best]), functions of the legs (median, 66.7) and lying/sitting/kneeling/standing (median, 67.5) were most impacted and self-care least impacted (median, 100.0). On HJHS, ankle scores (median, 6.0; range, 0-40) were worse than elbow/knee scores (median, 4.0/4.0). Results were consistent across PROs/HJHS. CONCLUSION: Data demonstrate challenges of predominantly ankle/knee pain and lower extremity functional impairment in US adult PWH, affecting HRQoL across PROs/HJHS.

Self-reported prevalence, description and management of pain in adults with haemophilia: methods, demographics and results from the Pain, Functional Impairment, and Quality of life (P-FiQ) study.

INTRODUCTION: Haemophilia is characterized by frequent haemarthrosis, leading to acute/chronic joint pain. AIM: To assess self-reported prevalence, description and management of pain in adult males with mild-to-severe haemophilia and history of joint pain/bleeding. METHODS: Participants completed a pain survey and five patient-reported outcome instruments assessing pain, functional impairment and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS: Of 381 participants enrolled, median age was 34 years; 77% had haemophilia A, 71% had severe disease and 65% were overweight/obese. Many (56%) were not receiving routine infusions; 30% never received routine infusions. During the prior 6 months, 20% experienced acute pain, 34% chronic pain and 32% both acute/chronic pain. Subjects with both acute/chronic pain (vs. none, acute or chronic) were more likely to be depressed (30% vs. 0-15%), obese (35% vs. 20-29%) and have lower HRQoL (mean EQ-5D visual analog scale, 69 vs. 83-86) and function (median overall Hemophilia Activities List, 60 vs. 88-99). Most common analgesics used for acute/chronic pain during the prior 6 months were acetaminophen (62%/55%) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (34%/49%); most common non-pharmacologic strategies were ice (65%/33%) and rest (51%/33%). Hydrocodone-acetaminophen was the most common opioid for both acute/chronic pain (30%); other long-acting opioids were infrequently used specifically for chronic but not acute pain (morphine, 7%; methadone, 6%; fentanyl patch, 2%). CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic pain, particularly those with both acute/chronic pain, frequently experience psychological issues, functional disability and reduced HRQoL. Treatment strategies for acute pain (e.g. routine infusions to prevent bleeding) and for chronic pain (e.g. long-acting opioids) may be underused.

Medical co-morbidities of patients with haemophilia: pain, obesity and hepatitis C.

Clinical care of patients with haemophilia (PWH) has progressed rapidly over the past decade. Current therapy has allowed patients with haemophilia to live longer and many patients are now experiencing the co-morbidities of the general population. In this review article, we focus on three common diseases states that affect PWH: chronic pain, obesity and hepatitis C. Pain has been a co-morbidity for many years and PWH often have unusual needs for chronic pain relief compared to the general population. Obesity is not only increasing in the general population but also in patients with hereditary bleeding disorders. The co-morbidity of obesity not only causes increased pain progression and joint damage but also affects the dosing of factor concentrates. Finally, hepatitis C is known to have infected the majority of patients who received non-virally inactivated pooled factor concentrates in the past. New treatment regimens have been developed that allow the nearly uniform cure of chronic hepatitis C with a short course of oral medications.

Predictors of non-adherence to prescribed prophylactic clotting-factor treatment regimens among adolescent and young adults with a bleeding disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Adherence to clotting-factor treatment regimens, especially among adolescents and young adults (AYAs), is under-researched. AIM: We determined factors associated with better adherence to prophylaxis. METHODS: From April through December 2012, a convenience sample of AYA (aged 13-25 years) persons with haemophilia or von Willebrand disease (VWD) completed an online survey that assessed adherence to prescribed prophylactic treatment regimens [Validated Haemophilia Regimen Treatment Adherence Scale (VERITAS)-Pro]. Logistic regression analysis assessed demographic and clinical factors related to non-adherence (VERITAS-Pro≥57). RESULTS: Seventy-three prophylactically treating AYAs participated. Of which, 88%, 8% and 4% had haemophilia A, B and VWD respectively. Almost all (90%) had severe disease and 58% had never developed an inhibitor. Most were aged 13-17 years (56%), white (78%), non-Hispanic (88%), never married (94%) and had some type of health insurance (96%). Median VERITAS-Pro score was 48 (range = 25-78) and 22 (30%) participants were non-adherent to prophylaxis (VERITAS-Pro≥57). Final logistic regression modelling suggested that, compared to those aged 13-17 years, participants aged 18-25 years were 6.2 (95% CI: 1.8-21.0; P < 0.01) times more likely to be non-adherent. Compared to respondents whose mother had at least a Bachelor's degree, respondents whose mother did not were 3.8 (95% CI: 1.0-14.3; P = 0.05) times more likely to be non-adherent. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that adherence efforts should be especially targeted to young adults as they transition from adolescence (i.e. parental supervision) and assume primary responsibility for their bleeding disorder care. Healthcare providers should be mindful of AYAs whose mothers have less formal education and ensure that adequate time and resources are dedicated to family adherence education.

Knowledge and attitudes survey in bleeding disorders providers regarding pain.

INTRODUCTION: The National Pain Study identified respondents (39%) were not satisfied with their pain management yet over 50% seek out their Haemophilia Treatment Centre (HTC) providers for pain management. This study's purpose was to assess the knowledge and attitudes of HTC providers regarding pain assessment and treatment. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-two HTC providers responded to a Survey Monkey™ Questionnaire. RESULTS: Knowledge deficits noted in pharmacology included (i) potentiators of opioids, (ii) time to peak effect of oral morphine, (iii) benzodiazepines usage as effective pain relievers and (iv) dose escalation/respiratory depression in an opioid tolerant patient. Areas of deficit in the substance abuse category involved (i) likelihood of a previous alcohol/drug abuse problem and (ii) signs and symptoms of discontinuation syndrome. Despite 100% confirmation from all providers that the patient is the best source of pain reporting, when presented with two identical case scenarios except for the patient's visual pain presentation; pain ratings were reported differently for patients who rated their pain similarly (8/10), yet displayed their pain symptoms differently resulting in different pain medication regimens. Responses were consistent between the provider groups but varied between case studies suggesting disparity between personal attitudes of providers when prescribing pain medication in the haemophilia population. CONCLUSIONS: Continued research in the area of haemophilia pain as well as treatment is needed. In addition, continuing pain education is recommended for HTC provider's at the local, regional and national levels so providers could remain up to date in the changes and progress of pain management theory.

Better adherence to prescribed treatment regimen is related to less chronic pain among adolescents and young adults with moderate or severe haemophilia.

Little data exist, especially for adolescent and young adult (AYA) persons with haemophilia (PWH), about the relationship between adherence to prescribed treatment regimen and chronic pain. We examined this relationship among PWH (moderate or severe) aged 13-25 via cross-sectional survey. Adherence was assessed using the Validated Hemophilia Regimen Treatment Adherence Scale (VERITAS)-Pro and VERITAS-PRN for prophylactic and on-demand participants respectively. VERITAS scores range from 24 (most adherent) to 120 (least adherent). Chronic pain was measured using the FPS-R and was dichotomized as high for FPS-R scores ≥4 and low for <4. Logistic regression models were constructed to assess factors associated with having high (vs. low) chronic pain. Of 80 AYA respondents (79 men), most had severe disease (91%), infused prophylactically (86%) and had haemophilia A (91%). Fifty-one per cent were aged 13-17 and most were white (76%), non-Hispanic (88%) and never married (93%). Chronic pain was reported as high for 35% of respondents. Mean VERITAS-Pro scores for those with high and low chronic pain were 53.6 ± 12.3 vs. 47.4 ± 12.9, P = 0.05. VERITAS-PRN scores were similar across chronic pain status. Logistic regression revealed that for each 10-point reduction (i.e. increase in adherence) in the combined VERITAS (Pro and PRN) and VERITAS-Pro scores there was a 35% (OR = 0.65; 95% CI = 0.44, 0.96; P = 0.03) and 39% (OR = 0.61; 95%CI = 0.39, 0.96; P = 0.03) reduction in odds of having high chronic pain respectively. Among AYA PWHs, better adherence was associated with significantly lower odds of having high chronic pain. Moreover, non-whites were >4 times as likely as whites to report high chronic pain.

Bihormonal fully closed-loop system for the treatment of type 1 diabetes: a real-world multicentre, prospective, single-arm trial in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Management of insulin administration for intake of carbohydrates and physical activity can be burdensome for people with type 1 diabetes on hybrid closed-loop systems. Bihormonal fully closed-loop (FCL) systems could help reduce this burden. In this trial, we assessed the long-term performance and safety of a bihormonal FCL system. METHODS: The FCL system (Inreda AP; Inreda Diabetic, Goor, Netherlands) that uses two hormones (insulin and glucagon) was assessed in a 1 year, multicentre, prospective, single-arm intervention trial in adults with type 1 diabetes. Participants were recruited in eight outpatient clinics in the Netherlands. We included adults with type 1 diabetes aged 18-75 years who had been using flash glucose monitoring or continuous glucose monitors for at least 3 months. Study visits were integrated into standard care, usually every three months, to evaluate glycaemic control, adverse events, and person-reported outcomes. The primary endpoint was time in range (TIR; glucose concentration 3·9-10·0 mmol/L) after 1 year. The study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register, NL9578. FINDINGS: Between June 1, 2021, and March 2, 2022, we screened 90 individuals and enrolled 82 participants; 78 were included in the analyses. 79 started the intervention and 71 were included in the 12 month analysis. Mean age was 47.7 (SD 12·4) years and 38 (49%) were female participants. The mean preintervention TIR of participants was 55·5% (SD 17·2). After 1 year of FCL treatment, mean TIR was 80·3% (SD 5·4) and median time below range was 1·36% (IQR 0·80-2·11). Questionnaire scores improved on Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) from 30·0 (IQR 18·8-41·3) preintervention to 10·0 (IQR 3·8-21·3; p<0·0001) at 12 months and on World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5) from 60·0 (IQR 44·0-72·0) preintervention to 76·0 (IQR 60·0-80·0; p<0·0001) at 12 months. Five serious adverse events were reported (one cerebellar stroke, two severe hypoglycaemic, and two hyperglycaemic events). INTERPRETATION: Real-world data obtained in this trial demonstrate that use of the bihormonal FCL system was associated with good glycaemic control in patients who completed 1 year of treatment, and could help relieve these individuals with type 1 diabetes from making treatment decisions and the burden of carbohydrate counting. FUNDING: Inreda Diabetic.

A national study of pain in the bleeding disorders community: a description of haemophilia pain.

UNLABELLED: The National Pain Study was a prospective, computer-based, descriptive survey of the pain experience of persons with a bleeding disorder conducted in the United States over a 28 month period from 2007 to 2009. The aim of this study was to (i) determine the language used by patients to describe and differentiate acute and persistent pain, (ii) describe pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies utilized to control pain, (iii) assess the perceived effectiveness of current pain management on quality of life and, (iv) to determine who provides pain management to this population. One thousand, one hundred and four surveys were received. Only the responses of the 764 respondents who reported having hemophilia A or B were evaluated for this paper. Thirty nine percent of participants reported their pain was not well treated. The average acute pain score associated with a bleed reported was 5.97/10 while the average persistent pain score reported was 4.22/10. The most frequently reported word descriptors for acute pain were: throbbing, aching, sharp, tender and miserable. The most frequently reported word descriptors for persistent pain were aching, nagging, tiring, sharp, and tender. The most frequently reported pain strategies for acute and persistent pain included factor, rest, ice, elevation, and compression. Alcohol and illicit drugs were reportedly used to manage both acute pain as well as persistent pain. Primarily, short-acting opioids and acetaminophen were reported to treat both acute and persistent pain. Hematologists and primary care providers provide the majority of pain management for persons with hemophilia (PWH). Quality of life (QOL) scores were lowest in the domains of pain, energy/fatigue and physical problems indicating disruption of QOL. This substantiates under-recognition and under-treatment of pain in the hemophilia population when combined with the 39% of respondents who felt their pain was not well treated and literature in the general pain population of wide spread under-treatment of pain. RECOMMENDATIONS: The NPS is an initial step in recognizing the prevalence and description of pain in PWH. HTC providers should educate themselves in pain management techniques to better serve this population. Further research is necessary to develop specific pain management guidelines for the bleeding disorders population that include multimodal holistic treatment plans.

Assessment and management of pain in haemophilia patients.

Haemophilia patients experience acute pain during joint bleeds and chronic pain from haemophilic arthropathy. More than 50% of haemophilia patients have painful joints that cause disability and impair quality of life. Unfortunately, only a few clinical studies have investigated the non-pharmacological or pharmacological treatments for pain or the adverse effects of pain on the health and quality of life of children and adults with haemophilia. There are no detailed algorithms or guidelines for pain management in haemophilia patients, and treatment is largely empirical. Therefore, a standardized approach to the management of pain in haemophilia patients is needed. This approach should include a close relationship between pain specialists and the staffs at haemophilia treatment centres; validated instruments specific to haemophilia for assessing pain, quality of life and disability; and stepwise algorithms/protocols for treatment of chronic vs. acute pain and prophylactic vs early treatment. A pain treatment protocol should include a definition of the problem of pain and best practices for physicians. A call to action is needed to standardize treatment approaches to pain and to develop algorithms/protocols for the management of pain in haemophilia patients. This review will highlight the prevalence and devastating impact of pain in haemophilia patients, currently available treatment options and identify the unmet needs for pain management.

Assessment of acute and persistent pain management in patients with haemophilia.

A descriptive survey was conducted in Region V-E of the United States to bridge the gap in available information on pain issues in the bleeding disorders population. The aim of this study was to a) determine language used by patients to describe and differentiate acute and persistent pain, b) describe pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies utilized to control pain, c) determine the providers of pain management to this population and d) evaluate quality of life incorporating the SF-36 QOL tool. A total of 202 surveys were returned. For the purposes of this paper, it was decided to analyse only haemophilia data (n = 114). Average persistent daily pain levels were 5/10 (P < 0.001). The three most common word descriptors for both acute and persistent pain were the same - achy, throbbing and tender; the most utilized pain medications were NSAIDs and acetaminophen. Factor replacement was used for what respondents described as acute pain management 79% of the time and for persistent pain management 38% of the time. Participants described acute and persistent pain with the same pain descriptors leading to the conclusion that patients have difficulty distinguishing between acute and persistent pain. This lack of differentiation was further displayed by the use of factor replacement to treat persistent pain associated with arthritic discomfort (38%) which would be viewed as inappropriate, as well as lack of factor replacement use by 21% of respondents who identified pain as from an acute bleed. Opportunities exist to improve pain management through patient and provider-directed educational programs.