Validation studies of rheumatoid arthritis patient-reported outcome measures in populations at risk for inequity: A systematic review and analysis using the OMERACT summary of measurement properties equity table.

BACKGROUND: Existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may be limited in their applicability to populations that are at risk for inequities. We conducted a systematic review to identify and rate evidence in the validation studies for PROMs in populations at risk for inequity. METHODS: A systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE was completed. The search strategy was developed to identify measurement property studies for PROMs of interest (selected pain, disease activity, global evaluation and quality of life scales) in patients with RA. We identified experimental, observational, and qualitative studies reporting analysis of feasibility, construct validity and discriminant ability metrics for populations at risk for inequity by various factors including race, ethnicity, culture or language; employment status; sex and gender identity; education level; socioeconomic status; social support; age; health literacy and disability. These were rated based on the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties Equity table. RESULTS: From 19,786 titles and abstracts screened, we identified 14 unique studies reporting validation metrics for pain (n = 3), DAS28-ESR or DAS28-CRP (n = 2), ACR20 (n = 1), patient global assessment (n = 2), EQ5D (n = 4), and PROMIS® (n = 3) by race (n = 10 studies), age (n = 6 studies), sex (n = 5 studies), education level (n = 2 studies), and disability, literacy, employment status, social support level and socioeconomic status (n = 1 study each). Five studies reported on feasibility, 12 reported construct validity metrics, and 4 studies reported on discriminant validity metrics. All studies by culture or language were rated as having good measurement property metrics. There was limited assessment of measurement property metrics for other populations at risk for inequity. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights important gaps in patient representation in rheumatology research for accepted outcome measures. New outcome measures being developed for research purposes and clinical practice should ensure and report representation of patients from populations at risk for inequities in the testing of metrics of feasibility, construct validity and discriminant ability metrics.

Development of an extension of the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties table to capture equity considerations: SOMP-Equity.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an equity extension of the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) Table, SOMP Equity to describe whether a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) works well among patients of diverse languages and cultures, education levels, and other population characteristics. METHODS: We used the PROGRESS-Plus framework to categorize equity characteristics assessed in trials of PROM. PROGRESS refers to Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social Capital, while the 'plus' captures additional characteristics, such as age. We pilot tested our SOMP Equity Extension using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) as a prototypical PROM. RESULTS: The SOMP Equity Extension retains the same columns as the original OMERACT SOMP (domain match, feasibility, construct validity, test-retest reliability, longitudinal construct validity, clinical trial discrimination, thresholds of meaning) but uses the PROGRESS-Plus characteristics as rows. We found several examples of studies of the HAQ which had assessed one or more PROGRESS-Plus characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The most commonly reported equity considerations were related to language. OMERACT Equity virtual meeting participants were polled and they indicated that the SOMP Equity Extension is useful for highlighting and tracking equity considerations for OMERACT Core Outcome Measurement Instruments.

Patient Perspectives on Smoking Cessation and Interventions in Rheumatology Clinics.

OBJECTIVE: Although smoking is a risk factor for cardiovascular and rheumatic disease severity, only 10% of rheumatology visits document cessation counseling. After implementing a rheumatology clinic protocol that increased tobacco quitline referrals 20-fold, we undertook this study to examine patients' barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation based on prior rheumatology experiences, to solicit reactions to the new cessation protocol, and to identify patient-centered outcomes or signs of cessation progress following improved care. METHODS: We recruited 19 patients who smoke (12 with rheumatoid arthritis [RA] and 7 with systemic lupus erythematosus [SLE]) to participate in 1 of 3 semistructured focus groups. Transcripts of the focus group discussions were analyzed using thematic analysis to classify barriers, facilitators, and signs of cessation progress. RESULTS: Participant-reported barriers and facilitators to cessation involved psychological, health-related, and social and economic factors, as well as health care messaging and resources. Commonly discussed barriers included viewing smoking as a crutch amid rheumatic disease, rarely receiving cessation counseling in rheumatology clinics, and very limited awareness that smoking can worsen rheumatic diseases or reduce efficacy of some rheumatic disease medications. Participants endorsed our cessation protocol with rheumatology-specific education and accessible resources, such as a quitline. Beyond quitting, participants prioritized knowing why and how to quit as signs of progress outcomes. CONCLUSION: Focus groups identified themes and categories of facilitators/barriers to smoking cessation at the levels of patient and health system. Two key outcomes of improving cessation care for patients with RA and SLE were knowing why and how to quit. Emphasizing rheumatologic health benefits and cessation resources is essential when designing and evaluating rheumatology smoking cessation interventions.

Managing Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Clinical Updates and Three Strategic Approaches.

ᅟ: The increase in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is well known; however, appropriate management of this elevated risk in rheumatology clinics is less clear. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: By critically reviewing literature published within the past 5 years, we aim to clarify current knowledge and gaps regarding CVD risk management in RA. RECENT FINDINGS: We examine recent guidelines, recommendations, and evidence and discuss three approaches: (1) RA-specific management including treat-to-target and medication management, (2) assessment of comprehensive individual risk, and (3) targeting traditional CVD risk factors (hypertension, smoking, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, obesity, and physical inactivity) at a population level. Considering that 75% of US RA visits occur in specialty clinics, further research is needed regarding evidence-based strategies to manage and reduce CVD risk in RA. This review highlights clinical updates including US cardiology and international professional society guidelines, successful evidence-based population approaches from primary care, and novel opportunities in rheumatology care to reduce CVD risk in RA.