An engineered glove to follow finger function in rheumatoid arthritis: an observational prospective study.

The engineered Hand Test System (HTS) glove has shown high reliability in assessing the baseline functional status of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) hand. Starting from this achievement, the aim of the present observational prospective study was to assess the functionality of the single fingers of rheumatoid hand at follow-up. Eighty RA patients performed HTS glove tests at baseline and among these fifty-six patients were re-tested after 7 months. The HTS glove parameters [Touch Duration (TD), Movement Rate (MR), Inter Tapping Interval (ITI)] were correlated with disease activity and disability clinimetric indexes [Disease Activity Score 28 joint count-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), grip strength, visual analogue scale of pain (VAS), patient global assessment (PGA)], and with laboratory values. HTS glove parameters (TD, ITI, and MR) showed statistically significant correlations with clinimetric and clinical indexes at both time points (p < 0.05). During follow-up, a statistically significant variation of all HTS glove parameters for the fingers that have performed both the worst or best HTS test at baseline was detected (p < 0.05), while the mean HTS glove parameter values by considering all fingers did not show a statistically significant variation over time, as well as the traditional clinimetric indexes. Besides the objective role in assessing the RA hand function by integrating the traditional clinimetric indexes, the HTS glove seems a useful tool for evaluating worst or best finger function during time by measuring the movement speed.

Management of giant cell arteritis among general practitioners from Genoa, Italy: a web-based survey.

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common form of vasculitis of the adult. General practitioners (GPs) are usually the first physicians who take care of GCA patients. In this study, the awareness of GPs from Genoa, Italy, regarding GCA was investigated by a web-based survey. A web-based questionnaire was sent by mail to 775 Italian GPs. It included 12 multiple choice questions regarding practice seniority, practice population size, number of GCA patients followed, and GPs' diagnostic and therapeutic approach. Of the 775 GPs involved, 76 (9.8%) answered. Thirty-three/75 (44%) declared that they did not see patients with GCA and the remaining 42 (56%) that they diagnose between one and two patients per year. New headache onset was the presenting feature of GCA for the majority of GPs (78.3%). GCA was diagnosed on the basis of clinical presentation alone by 35.2% of them, of temporal artery biopsy by 49.3%, and by imaging, including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, by 15.5%. The referral pattern was mainly toward rheumatologists (68.5%). Only 27.8% GPs declared they start treatment at the first clinical suspicion, with the others waiting for laboratory and imaging examinations or specialist consultation. The doses of glucocorticoids used were in keeping with current guidelines. The management of GCA by GPs from Genoa is in general correct, with the exceptions of excessive confidence in headaches for diagnosis and of the timing of GC initiation. These points suggest that a program of information and education for GPs is warranted.