ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Fibromyalgia is a polysymptomatic syndrome with a prevalence between 0.2% and 13% of the population and causes work disabilities in approximately half of affected patients. Several treatments to fibromyalgia have been proposed with partial improvement. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy and when it should be introduced to fibromyalgia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for an open-label, crossover, randomised clinical trial comparing treatment with hyperbaric oxygen therapy and standardised treatment to fibromyalgia. In the proposed study, 56 individuals with fibromyalgia will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio into a single, fixed, random block, in which one group will receive hyperbaric oxygen therapy and another will receive standard treatment. Subsequently, the groups will be crossed. Participants will be evaluated at baseline, eight and 16 weeks based on functional impairment assessed with the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire-Brazilian Portuguese version, psychopathological symptoms questionnaire and short-form quality of life questionnaire. The improvement of symptoms concerning the moment of therapy used will be compared between groups. For sample size calculation, a moderate effect size, 80% power and 95% CI will be estimated, in a total of 46 patients. Considering a dropout of 20%, 56 patients should be recruited. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora Teaching Hospital ethics committee and assigned the number 53058421.9.0000.5133 (version 3). The results will be disseminated via publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations in medical meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: RBR-6prps8g)/UTN U1111-1278-3224.
Subject(s)
Fibromyalgia , Hyperbaric Oxygenation , Humans , Fibromyalgia/therapy , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome , Exercise Therapy/methods , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
Abstract Objectives: Describe Brazilian rheumatologists's competence in interventional rheumatology; assess the association between this ability and demographic and training variables. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 500 Brazilian rheumatologists. Participants were assessed by self-administered questionnaire consisting of demographics, training, practice in office and knowledge in interventional rheumatology data. Results: 463 participants had their data analyzed. The mean age was 40.2 years (±11.2). 70% had performed periarticular injections and 78% had performed intra-articular injections. The sample was divided into three groups: non-interventionist, little interventionist and very interventionist. The non-interventionist group showed (p < 0.001-0.04) higher mean age, lower proportion of university bond, lower training history, higher proportion of graduates in the Southeast country, and higher proportion of graduates in the 1980s to 1989. The very interventionist group showed higher (p < 0.001-0.018) proportion of adult rheumatologists, higher proportion of university bond, longer training time with greater practice of complex procedures, and higher proportion of graduates, trained and with private practice in the South country. Variables most associated with the very interventionist subgroup are performing axial intra-articular injections (OR: 7.4, p < 0.001), synovial biopsy (OR: 5.75, p = 0.043), image-guided IAI (OR: 4.16, p < 0.001), viscosupplementation (OR = 3.41, p < 0.001), joint lavage (OR = 3.22, p = 0.019), salivary gland biopsy (OR = 2.16, p = 0.034) and over 6-month training (OR: 2.16, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Performing more complex invasive procedures and over 6-month training in interventional rheumatology were variables associated with enhanced interventional profile.
Resumo Objetivos: Descrever a competência dos reumatologistas brasileiros na reumatologia intervencionista (RI); avaliar a associação entre essa capacidade e variáveis demográficas e de treinamento. Métodos: Fez-se um estudo transversal com 500 reumatologistas brasileiros. Os participantes foram avaliados por questionário autoadministrado, constituído por dados demográficos, treinamento, prática em consultório e conhecimento em dados de RI. Resultados: Analisaram-se os dados de 463 participantes. A média foi de 40,2 anos (± 11,2). Desses, 70% fizeram injeções periarticulares (IPA) e 78% intra-articulares (IIA). A amostra foi dividida em três grupos: não intervencionista, pouco intervencionista e muito intervencionista. O grupo não intervencionista apresentou (p < 0,001 - 0,04) maior média de idade, menor proporção de vínculo universitário, menor história de treinamento, maior proporção de graduados na Região Sudeste do país e maior proporção de graduados nas décadas de 1980 a 1989. O grupo muito intervencionista apresentou (p < 0,001 - 0,018) maior proporção de reumatologias que atendem pacientes adultos, maior proporção de vínculo universitário, maior tempo de treinamento de prática de procedimentos complexos, maior proporção de graduados no sul do país, treinados e com consultório particular nessa região. As variáveis mais frequentemente associadas ao subgrupo muito intervencionista foram realização de IIA axial (OR: 7,4, p < 0,001), biópsia sinovial (OR: 5,75, p = 0,043), IIA guiada por imagem (OR: 4,16, p < 0,001), viscossuplementação (OR = 3,41, p < 0,001), lavagem articular (OR = 3,22, p = 0,019), biópsia da glândula salivar (OR = 2,16, p = 0,034) e mais de seis meses de treinamento (OR: 2,16; p = 0,008). Conclusões: Fazer procedimentos invasivos mais complexos e ter mais de seis meses de treinamento em RI foram as variáveis associadas a um maior perfil intervencionista.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Rheumatology/standards , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Clinical Competence , Injections, Intra-Articular/statistics & numerical data , Rheumatology/education , Brazil , Cross-Sectional Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Rheumatologists/statistics & numerical data , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Describe Brazilian rheumatologists's competence in interventional rheumatology; assess the association between this ability and demographic and training variables. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with 500 Brazilian rheumatologists. Participants were assessed by self-administered questionnaire consisting of demographics, training, practice in office and knowledge in interventional rheumatology data. RESULTS: 463 participants had their data analyzed. The mean age was 40.2 years (±11.2). 70% had performed periarticular injections and 78% had performed intra-articular injections. The sample was divided into three groups: non-interventionist, little interventionist and very interventionist. The non-interventionist group showed (p<0.001-0.04) higher mean age, lower proportion of university bond, lower training history, higher proportion of graduates in the Southeast country, and higher proportion of graduates in the 1980s to 1989. The very interventionist group showed higher (p<0.001-0.018) proportion of adult rheumatologists, higher proportion of university bond, longer training time with greater practice of complex procedures, and higher proportion of graduates, trained and with private practice in the South country. Variables most associated with the very interventionist subgroup are performing axial intra-articular injections (OR: 7.4, p<0.001), synovial biopsy (OR: 5.75, p=0.043), image-guided IAI (OR: 4.16, p<0.001), viscosupplementation (OR=3.41, p<0.001), joint lavage (OR=3.22, p=0.019), salivary gland biopsy (OR=2.16, p=0.034) and over 6-month training (OR: 2.16, p=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Performing more complex invasive procedures and over 6-month training in interventional rheumatology were variables associated with enhanced interventional profile.
