Development and usability of a decision aid to initiate anti-osteoporosis medication treatment in patients visiting the fracture liaison service with a recent fracture.

This study describes the development of a decision aid (DA), aimed at supporting patients in their decision whether to start anti-osteoporosis medication. People with recent fractures or osteoporosis and health professionals were supportive of the DA initiative. An experimental study been started to assess (cost-)effectiveness of the DA. PURPOSE: At fracture liaison services (FLS), patients with a recent fracture ánd osteoporosis or a prevalent vertebral fracture are advised to start anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM). This study describes the development of a decision aid (DA) to support patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) in their decision about whether to start AOM. METHODS: The DA was developed according to International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). A systematic procedure was chosen including scope, design, prototype development, and alpha testing. A previously developed DA for women with osteoporosis was used as a basis. Furthermore, input from literature searches, the Dutch guideline on management of osteoporosis, and from people with a fracture or osteoporosis was used. The updated DA was evaluated during alpha testing. RESULTS: The DA facilitates the decision of patients whether to initiate AOM treatment and provides information on fractures and osteoporosis, general risk factors that increase the likelihood of a subsequent fracture, the role of lifestyle, personalized risk considerations of a subsequent fracture with and without AOM treatment, and AOM options and their characteristics in an option grid. Alpha testing with 15 patients revealed that patient preferences and needs were adequately presented, and several suggestions for improvement (e.g. adding more specific information, simplifying terminology, improving icon use) were accounted for. Participants from the alpha testing recommended use of the DA during outpatient visits. CONCLUSION: Professionals and persons with osteoporosis were supportive of the proposed DA and its usability. The DA could help in a shared decision-making process between patients and HCPs.

Points to consider: EULAR-UEMS standards for the training of European rheumatologists.

BACKGROUND: Postgraduate rheumatology training programmes are already established at a national level in most European countries. However, previous work has highlighted a substantial level of heterogeneity in the organisation and, in part, content of programmes. OBJECTIVE: To define competences and standards of knowledge, skills and professional behaviours required for the training of rheumatologists. METHODS: A European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) task force (TF) of 23 experts, including two members of the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) section of rheumatology, was convened. The mapping phase consisted of the retrieval of key documents on specialty training in rheumatology and other related specialties across a broad set of international sources. The content of these documents was extracted and represented the foundation for the document draft that underwent several rounds of online discussion within the TF, and afterwards was also distributed to a broad group of stakeholders for collecting feedback. The list of generated competences was voted on during the TF meetings, while the level of agreement (LoA) with each statement was established by anonymous online voting. RESULTS: A total of 132 international training curricula were retrieved and extracted. In addition to the TF members, 253 stakeholders commented and voted on the competences through an online anonymous survey. The TF developed (1) an overarching framework indicating the areas that should be addressed during training, (2) 7 domains defining broad areas that rheumatology trainees should master by the end of the training programme, (3) 8 core themes defining the nuances of each domain and (4) 28 competences that trainees should acquire to cover each of the areas outlined in the overarching framework. A high LoA was achieved for all competences. CONCLUSION: These points to consider for EULAR-UEMS standards for the training of European rheumatologists are now defined. Their dissemination and use can hopefully contribute to harmonising training across European countries.

Prevalence of frailty and pre-frailty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is a common geriatric syndrome and is characterised by a decreased physiological reserve and increased vulnerability to stressors. Pre-frailty is a risk-state before frailty. A systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis was conducted to: (1) estimate the prevalence of (pre-)frailty in RA patients; (2) explore whether variation in instruments influences (pre-)frailty prevalence. METHODS: An SLR for the period 2001-2021 was undertaken. All studies (including conference abstracts) that reported on the prevalence of (pre)-frailty in patients with RA were included. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and data synthesis were performed by two reviewers independently. A meta-analysis was conducted for studies that used the most commonly accepted frailty instrument (Fried criteria), by obtaining pooled estimates of (pre-) frailty prevalences by random effects models. RESULTS: 25/1,363 studies were included in the SLR. Weighted average age was 58.0 years. Pre-frailty prevalence rates ranged between 20.4%-71% (median: 35.8%); for frailty, rates between 1.2%-75.1% (median: 23.1%) were found. The meta-analysis (Fried criteria), showed a pooled prevalence of 52.8% (95%-CI=42.7-62.8; I2=99%) for pre-frailty and 24.0% (95%-CI= 19.4-28.6; I2=96%) for frailty. (Pre-)frailty was highly prevalent in all age groups. Prevalence was generally higher when the frailty instrument also included psychological and social domains, as compared to instruments that solely focused on the physical domain. CONCLUSIONS: (Pre-)frailty is common in RA patients. Large part of the variation is explained by clinical and methodological heterogeneity. High-quality studies with validated frailty instruments specifically for RA patients are needed.

2019 EULAR points to consider for the assessment of competences in rheumatology specialty training.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Striving for harmonisation of specialty training and excellence of care in rheumatology, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) established a task force to develop points to consider (PtCs) for the assessment of competences during rheumatology specialty training. METHODS: A systematic literature review on the performance of methods for the assessment of competences in rheumatology specialty training was conducted. This was followed by focus groups in five selected countries to gather information on assessment practices and priorities. Combining the collected evidence with expert opinion, the PtCs were formulated by the multidisciplinary task force, including rheumatologists, medical educationalists, and people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. The level of agreement (LoA) for each PtC was anonymously voted online. RESULTS: Four overarching principles and 10 PtCs were formulated. The overarching principles highlighted the importance of assessments being closely linked to the rheumatology training programme and protecting sufficient time and resources to ensure effective implementation. In the PtCs, two were related to overall assessment strategy (PtCs 1 and 5); three focused on formative assessment and portfolio (PtCs 2-4); three focused on the assessment of knowledge, skills or professionalism (PtCs 6-8); one focused on trainees at risk of failure (PtC 9); and one focused on training the trainers (PtC 10). The LoA (0-10) ranged from 8.75 to 9.9. CONCLUSION: These EULAR PtCs provide European guidance on assessment methods throughout rheumatology training programmes. These can be used to benchmark current practices and to develop future strategies, thereby fostering continuous improvement in rheumatology learning and, ultimately, in patient care.

What do we measure with 28-joint DAS in elderly patients? An explorative analysis in the NOR-DMARD study.

OBJECTIVE: Insight into the influence of ageing on disease outcomes is limited. The objective of this study was to examine the potential effect of age on disease activity using the 28-joint DAS (DAS28) and its components in patients with RA. METHODS: Baseline data of DMARD-naïve patients with RA from the Norwegian Register of DMARDs were used. Linear regression explored the strength of the association between age (<45, 45-65 and >65 years) and each DAS28 component while accounting for education and gender. Adjusted predicted scores for DAS28 components and total DAS28 score were calculated for each age category. RESULTS: Baseline data from 2037 patients [mean age 55.2 years (s.d. 14.0), 68% females] were available. Regression models had to be stratified for gender (P for interaction <0.001); education was a significant covariate. Males >65 years of age with an intermediate level of education have a 56% higher ESR and 25% higher 28-joint swollen joint count as compared with their younger counterparts (<45 years). For females, corresponding differences were 51% and 27%, respectively. The age effect on the 28-joint tender joint count and patient global assessment was negligible. In patients with an intermediate education level, DAS28 was 5.0 vs 5.5 (10% increase) in the youngest vs oldest age groups, independent of gender. CONCLUSION: The age-related increase in ESR and 28-joint swollen joint count scores without a relevant corresponding increase in 28-joint tender joint count and patient global assessment might imply that age-related processes (e.g. soft tissue changes, physiological ESR increase) contribute to a higher DAS28 in elderly patients.

Validation of two frailty questionnaires in older patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Several questionnaires exist to assess frailty, a geriatric syndrome. None of these has been validated in older patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Our objective was to assess aspects of validity of two frailty questionnaires: Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) and Geriatric 8 (G8) among RA patients. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study among patients ≥65 years information was collected on socio-demographics, disease characteristics including comorbidities and physical function and on frailty using the GFI and G8. Content validity was assessed by linking items of the GFI and G8 to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Classic psychometric methods were used to test hypotheses on construct validity and interpretability. RESULTS: Eighty patients (74.6 years (SD 5.9); 66% female) participated. The GFI has more items on social and mental functions; the G8 more on functions of the digestive system (e.g. nutritional status). As hypothesised, correlations (r) with physical function (RGFI=0.54; RG8=0.56) and disease activity (RGFI=0.24; RG8=0.36) were moderate to weak. However, correlations with age (RGFI=0.20; RG8=0.11) or comorbidities (RGFI=0.30; RG8=0.16) were lower than expected. Instrument-specific thresholds classified 43 (54%) of participants as frail on the GFI and 44 (55%) on the G8; 33 (41%) were frail on both instruments. CONCLUSIONS: The GFI and G8 differ in content with more emphasis on nutritional status for the G8. Both instruments are insensitive to age and comorbidities. Before deciding on their usefulness in RA, their predictive validity for mortality and resource utilisation independent of disease activity and physical function should be further evaluated.

Geriatric syndromes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a literature overview.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic inflammatory disease of unknown aetiology which principally affects the small joints of the hands and feet. The incidence of RA increases with age and peaks within the age range of 70 to 79 years. In the ageing population, therefore, it is expected that the number of patients with RA will grow proportionally and more patients will have comorbidities but also so-called geriatric syndromes (GS). GS are clinical and multifactorial conditions in older persons that are associated with poor health outcomes, do not fit into disease categories (comorbidities) and require a multidimensional treatment approach. Patients suffering from RA may be at increased risk for GS. Therefore, it is important that rheumatologists are knowledgeable about the constructs represented by GS, understand the main risk factors, and gain insight in how to recognise these syndromes. Limited awareness of the (risk for) GS in patients with RA among rheumatologists may lead to ineffective management of RA. Our objective was to provide a comprehensive overview about the prevalence, aetiologic factors and health consequences of the most important GS in patients with RA.

The challenging interplay between rheumatoid arthritis, ageing and comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is expected to increase over the next 10 years in the European Union because of the increasing proportion of elderly people. As both RA and ageing are associated with emerging comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, malignancies and osteoporosis, these factors will have a profound effect on the management of RA. In addition, both increasing age and comorbidities may independently alter commonly used RA-specific outcome measures. DISCUSSION: Age-related decline in immune cell functions (immunosenescence), such as a decrease in T-cell function, may contribute to the development of RA, as well as comorbidity. The chronic immune stimulation that occurs in RA may also lead to premature ageing and comorbidity. The interplay between RA, ageing and (emerging) comorbidities is interesting but complex. Cardiovascular disease, lung disease, malignancies, bone and muscle wasting and neuropsychiatric disease all occur more frequently in RA patients as compared to the general population. It is unclear how RA should be managed in 'today's world of multiple comorbidities'. Evidence that treatment of RA improves comorbidities is currently lacking, although some promising indirect observations are available. On the other hand, there is limited evidence that medication regularly prescribed for comorbidities, such as statins, might improve RA disease activity. Both ageing and comorbidity have an independent effect on commonly used outcome measures in the RA field, such as the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the clinical disease activity index (CDAI). Prospective studies, that also account for the presence of comorbidity in (elderly) RA patients are therefore urgently needed. To address gaps in knowledge, future research should focus on the complex interdependencies between RA, ageing and comorbidity. In addition, these findings should be integrated into daily clinical practice by developing and testing integrated and coordinated health care services. Adaptation of management recommendations is likely required. The elderly RA patient who also deals with (emerging) comorbidities presents a unique challenge to treating clinicians. A paradigm shift from disease-centered to goal-oriented approach is needed to develop adequate health care services for these patients.

Challenges in the management of older patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

The rise in the number of people aged 65 years and older living with inflammatory rheumatic diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis is causing considerable challenges for clinicians. As patients get older, they are at an increased risk of multiple chronic diseases, a situation termed multimorbidity. Multimorbidity inevitably drives polypharmacy, where by a patient requires treatment with multiple medications. In addition, advancing age, multimorbidity and polypharmacy all place a patient at an increased risk of developing geriatric syndromes, which are clinical conditions in older people that do not fit into disease categories and include malnutrition, sarcopenia and frailty. Geriatric syndromes further increase the risk of adverse outcomes, including the accrual of additional morbidity, nursing home admission and mortality. Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases are especially prone to developing geriatric syndromes. Some predisposing risk factors for geriatric syndromes, such as joint swelling and functional limitations, are also inherent to rheumatic inflammatory disease itself. The frequent coexistence of multimorbidity, polypharmacy and geriatric syndromes in this patient group requires individually tailored interventions to preserve patient independence and overall functioning. To prepare for the changing demography, rheumatologists should gain more insight into the implications of multimorbidity, polypharmacy and geriatric syndromes for the management of older patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

Frailty in relation to psycho-social factors in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A cross-sectional mixed qualitative-quantitative study.

AIM: The aim of the study was to explore in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) ≥55 years: (1) whether the occurrence of frailty as measured by the Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI) increases with age (survey 1); and (2) to gain insight into which frailty characteristics (eg, loneliness) contribute to frailty (survey 2). METHODS: The GFI was assessed in 3 age groups (55-64/65-74/≥75-years), ensuring equal representation. GFI-subdomains that discriminated most between those classified as frail were further studied in a subset of patients using validated domain-specific questionnaires (eg Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]) and semi-structured interviews. Questionnaires were filled out twice: for current age and the recalled situation at age 40, to see whether psychiatric symptomatology might be misinterpreted for frailty. RESULTS: Of 90 patients included, frailty prevalence on the GFI across age groups was 43.3%-40.0%-43.4%, respectively. Frail patients often reported depressive (73.7% vs. 11.5%) and anxious (57.9% vs. 15.4%) feelings. There were 32/90 patients who filled out the psycho-social questionnaires twice. More frail patients had signs of an anxiety disorder on the HADS (missing data 4 patients), both at current age (5/11 frail patients vs. 0/17 non-frail patients, P = .01) and age 40 (7/11 frail patients vs. 0/0 non-frail patients, P < .01). During the interviews, especially frail patients reported gloomy feelings, although none confirmed depression or anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is highly prevalent in RA patients ≥55 years. As frail patients were characterized by symptoms of anxiety both at current age but (recalled) also at age 40, this finding suggests that pre-existing psychiatric symptomatology may confound assessment of frailty.

Development and Evaluation of a Clinic for Elderly Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Multimorbidity: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: Integrating patient's and physician's goals, especially in elderly patients with multimorbidity, might ultimately improve care. Efforts to develop such care innovations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are lacking. The objective of our study was to develop and to pilot test a clinic for elderly patients with RA and multimorbidity. METHODS: First, a referral strategy for and the content of an Elderly Multimorbidity Clinic (EMC) was developed. Next, the EMC was implemented, and it primarily focused on the personal goals of patients and medication review. The EMC was evaluated in a quantitative-qualitative approach. RESULTS: Referral considered useful by the rheumatologist was chosen as the referral criterion. A rheumatologist and internist-geriatrician provided care to referred patients (≥ 55 years) at the EMC during three visits over 1 year. Twenty patients with RA participated in the pilot study (mean age 76.8±7.7 years; 30% male). Only 12 (60%) patients attended the first follow-up consultation, and three (15%) attended the second follow-up consultation. During any follow-up visit, 9/12 (75%) patients achieved one or more goals. Examples of accomplished goals were reduction of medication and improvement of mobility. In 19/20 (95%) patients, medication was remediated (stop medication for 13 patients; start medication for five patients) during the first visit. After 1 year, medication was changed back in 10 patients. Rheumatologists revealed uncertainty about meaningful referral, and patients and rheumatologists mentioned high (caregiver) burden because of extra visits as reasons for not attending follow-up. Patients were satisfied with the care provided. CONCLUSION: This goal-directed EMC led to the accomplishment of at least one goal in 75% of patients. Sustained benefits could not be demonstrated because of low follow-up.

EULAR portfolio for Rheumatology training: a EULAR School of Rheumatology initiative.

OBJECTIVE: About half of the rheumatology trainees do not use a portfolio. This project was established to reach consensus about the content of a EULAR portfolio for Rheumatology training and subsequently develop portfolio assessment forms. METHODS: After establishing a portfolio working group (WG), including nine rheumatologists and one educationalist, a systematic literature review (SLR) on the content and structure of portfolios for postgraduate learning was conducted (November 2018). This was followed by a survey among WG members and members of the EMerging EUlar NETwork, inquiring about the content and structure of existing national portfolios. The portfolio WG selected the key components of the portfolio, taking previous experience and feasibility into account. Assessment forms (eg, case-based discussion) were developed and pilot-tested. RESULTS: 13/2034 articles were included in the SLR (12 high/1 moderate risk of bias). Information on procedural skills, personal reflections, learning goals and multisource feedback was most often included a portfolio. Twenty-five respondents completed the survey (response≈50%). Feedback from assessors, reflective writing and formulation of learning goals were considered important dimensions to be covered in a portfolio. Six key components of the portfolio were established: curriculum vitae, personal development plan, clinical work, professional behaviours, education and research activities. Suggested minimal content for each component was formulated. Four assessment forms were successfully pilot-tested by 11 rheumatologists and their trainees. CONCLUSION: A EULAR portfolio for Rheumatology training and assessment forms were developed. Portfolio implementation, particularly in countries without an existing portfolio, may promote a higher standard of rheumatology training across Europe.

Rheumatologists' Views and Experiences in Managing Rheumatoid Arthritis in Elderly Patients: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: In this qualitative study we analyzed the (1) influence of age, comorbidity, and frailty on management goals in elderly patients with RA; (2) experiences of rheumatologists regarding the use of the Disease Activity Score at 28 joints (DAS28) to monitor disease activity; and (3) differences in management strategies in elderly patients with RA compared to their younger counterparts. METHODS: Rheumatologists were purposively sampled for a semistructured interview. Two readers independently read and coded the interview transcripts. Important concepts were taxonomically categorized and combined in overarching themes by using NVivo 11 software. RESULTS: Seventeen rheumatologists (mean age 44.8 yrs, SD 7.7 yrs; 29% male) from 9 medical centers were interviewed. Preserving an acceptable level of functioning was the most important management goal in patients ≥ 80 years and in patients with high levels of comorbidity and frailty. The DAS28 score less frequently steered the management strategy, because rheumatologists commented that comorbidity and an age-related erythrocyte sedimentation rate elevation might distort the DAS28 score. Instead, management of elderly patients highly depended on comorbidity, frailty, and their subsequent effects such as cognitive and physical decline, dependency, and polypharmacy. Presence of 1 or more of these factors frequently resulted in a less future-oriented management approach with less emphasis on the maximal prevention of joint erosions. CONCLUSION: The treat-to-target model is not automatically adopted in the elderly patient population. Future evidence-based RA management recommendations for elderly patients with RA are needed and should account for factors such as comorbidity and frailty.

Disease and management beliefs of elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis and comorbidity: a qualitative study.

To explore in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and comorbidity (1) in which order and why patients prioritize their morbidities with regard to functioning and health, (2) their beliefs about common (age-related) musculoskeletal complaints, and (3) experiences about the influence of comorbidity on medication treatment of RA. Patients between 50 and 85 years with RA and ≥ 1 comorbidity or lifestyle risk factor were invited for a semi-structured interview. Two readers coded the transcripts of the interviews, by using NVivo11 software. Fifteen patients (14 women; mean age 67 years (range 51-83 years); mean disease duration 14 years (range 1-39 years)) were interviewed. Only 3 (20%) out of 15 patients prioritized RA over their comorbidity; these patients often experienced severe functional limitations. The level of current or (perceived) future disability, risk of dependency, and the perceived lethality of a condition were considered by participants when prioritizing morbidities. Most participants had misconceptions about common age-related musculoskeletal complaints. Consequently, these participants attributed all joint complaints or even all physical complaints to RA, disregarding degenerative joint disease and physiological aging as alternative diagnoses. Half of the participants ever had to change RA medication because of comorbidity. Most of these patients had prioritized the comorbidity, sometimes even over treatment of RA disease activity. Most elderly RA patients with comorbidity prioritize the importance and treatment of comorbidity over RA. Better understanding of patients' beliefs on RA and comorbidity is essential when managing chronic conditions in elderly patients.

Medication adherence among patients with gout: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In the management of chronic gout, a large proportion of patients need long-term management with urate lowering therapy (ULT). This study reviews medication adherence to ULT and summarizes factors associated with adherence. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for studies on adherence to ULT among gout patients in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. We conducted meta-analysis, with a random effect model, for the studies reporting the proportion of patients considered adherent to at least 80% of prescribed medication or time taken. We explored potential sources of heterogeneity, including geographic area and measure of adherence. Narrative summaries were made for data on adherence assessed/defined by Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS)/pill-count or patient-reported, occurrence of a gap in therapy ≥30 days (non-persistence), and factors associated with adherence. RESULTS: Of the 24 studies, 16 assessed adherence using prescription/claims data, two by the MEMS or pill count, and six by patient-reported data. The pooled proportion of adherent patients (n = 13) was 46% (95% CI: 41-51); 45% across studies conducted in the USA (n = 8) and 48% in other countries (n = 5). Adherence assessed by MEMS/pill count and patient-reported was much higher than by studies using prescription/claims data. Non-persistence (n = 6) ranged from 54% to 87%. Factors associated with adherence were investigated in 18 studies. Strong evidence for a positive association with older age, more comorbidities, and the presence of diabetes or hypertension was found. CONCLUSION: Medication adherence to ULT among gout patients was poor. Better insight into reasons and consequences or poor adherence is needed.

GPs' patterns of clinical assessment when faced with a patient suspected for spondyloarthritis: a prospective educational intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Timely recognition and referral of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) is challenging due to the frequent unawareness of the clinical picture. AIM: To identify clinical assessment patterns of GPs and GP-residents when facing a patient suspected of having SpA, and to determine which components of clinical assessment were most prevalent prior to referral to the rheumatologist and whether targeted education could positively influence pattern recognition. DESIGN & SETTING: Prospective multicentre educational intervention study in primary care practices in the Netherlands. METHOD: GPs and GP-residents were visited in two rounds by standardised patients (SPs) simulating axial or peripheral SpA (dactylitis). Between these rounds, an educational intervention regarding SpA took place for part of the participants. SPs completed a case-specific checklist inquiring about disease-related items and items on physical examination. RESULTS: Sixty-eight participants (30 GPs and 38 GP-residents) were included and 19 (28%) received the educational intervention. In round 1, about half of the participants asked at least one question to differentiate between an inflammatory or mechanical origin of the back pain or peripheral complaint; on average, <15% asked for extra-articular manifestations. After education, GP-residents inquired more about the presence of extra-articular manifestations and family history of axial SpA; this pattern was also observed in the GPs and GP-residents who correctly referred the SP. In the peripheral SpA case, the observed gain was less evident when compared to the axial SpA case. CONCLUSION: Pattern recognition of patients suspected for SpA by GP(-residents) is essential for referral to a rheumatologist and can be improved by education.

Global Prevalence of Spondyloarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the prevalence of spondyloarthritis (SpA) and its subtypes in the general population, and to identify demographic and methodologic characteristics that might explain heterogeneity in prevalence estimates. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant articles. Risk of bias was assessed and data were extracted. Pooled prevalences were calculated. Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored by subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of SpA ranged from 0.20% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.00-0.66) in South-East Asia to 1.61% (95% CI 1.27-2.00) in Northern Arctic communities; the prevalence of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) from 0.02% (95% CI 0.00-0.21) in Sub-Saharan Africa to 0.35% (95% CI 0.24-0.48) in Northern Arctic communities; and the prevalence of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) from 0.01% (95% CI 0.00-0.17) in the Middle East to 0.19% (95% CI 0.16-0.32) in Europe. The following characteristics were significantly associated with variation in prevalence of SpA, AS, and/or PsA: proportion of females, mean age of the sample, geographic area and setting (demographic characteristics), year of data collection, case finding, and case ascertainment (methodologic characteristics). For the other SpA subgroups, too few studies were available to conduct a meta-analysis, but prevalence estimates of reactive arthritis (range 0.0-0.2%), SpA related to inflammatory bowel disease (range 0.0-0.1%), and undifferentiated SpA (range 0.0-0.7%) were generally low. CONCLUSION: SpA is a common disease, but with large variation in reported prevalence estimates, which can partly be explained by differences in demographic and methodologic characteristics. Particularly, geographic area as well as case finding account for a substantial part of the heterogeneity.

Development and Validation of a Short Form of the Social Role Participation Questionnaire in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis.

OBJECTIVE: The Social Role Participation Questionnaire (SRPQ) assesses the influence of health on 11 specific roles and 1 general role along 4 dimensions. In this study, a shortened version of the SRPQ (s-SRPQ) was developed in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) to facilitate data collection in clinical studies and practice. METHODS: Using data from 246 patients with AS and population controls, the fit of each role to the different participation dimensions, the contribution of each role to the measurement precision, and the correlation between dimensions were evaluated using item response theory. Representation of the 3 participation chapters of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health was ensured. Reliability of each dimension of both versions of the SRPQ was compared by correlating scores to the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) and the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS), and by comparing ability to discriminate between patients and controls and between patients with low and high disease activity (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index ≥ 4). RESULTS: The s-SRPQ, which assesses participation across 6 social roles along 2 dimensions (physical difficulty and satisfaction with performance), was proposed. Both dimensions of the s-SRPQ were highly reliable (r ≥ 0.86) and were shown to have construct validity as indicated by a similar pattern of correlations with the SF-36 and SWLS as the original SRPQ dimensions. Both versions discriminated well between patients and controls and between patients with high versus low disease activity (relative validity ≥ 0.72). CONCLUSION: The s-SRPQ retains the measurement properties of the original SRPQ and seems useful for measuring the effect of AS on participation.