Real-world utilisation and switching between Janus kinase inhibitors in Australian patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the OPAL dataset.

OBJECTIVES: To describe use and treatment persistence for Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by line of therapy, and the mechanism of action for the drug switched to after JAKi discontinuation. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational analysis using the OPAL dataset, a large collection of deidentified electronic medical records from 112 rheumatologists around Australia. Adult patients with RA were included if they initiated tofacitinib (TOF), baricitinib (BARI) or upadacitinib (UPA) between 1 October 2015 and 30 September 2021. Data were summarised using descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier survival was used to analyse treatment persistence. RESULTS: 5,900 patients initiated JAKi within the study window (TOF n=3,662, BARI n=1,875, UPA n=1,814). Median persistence was similar across JAKi within each line of therapy where there was sufficient follow-up, and almost 3 years for first-line: 34.9 months (95% CI 30.8, 40.7; n=1,408) for TOF, 33.6 months (95% CI 25.7, not reached; n=545) for BARI. While JAKi to JAKi switching occurred across all lines of therapy, switches to a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) were more frequent after first- or second-line JAKi. JAKi monotherapy use at baseline increased with line of therapy, and was highest at follow-up after switching to another JAKi. 'Lack of efficacy' was the most common reason for discontinuing JAKi. CONCLUSIONS: In this large analysis of Australian real-world practice separated by line of therapy, treatment persistence for JAKi was high overall subject to differential follow-up, but declined in later lines. JAKi to JAKi switching was observed across all lines of therapy.

PROMIS-29 in rheumatoid arthritis patients who screen positive or negative for fibromyalgia on MDHAQ FAST4 (fibromyalgia assessment screening tool) or 2011 fibromyalgia criteria.

BACKGROUND: PROMIS-29 T-scores query health-related quality of life (HRQL) in 7 domains, physical function, pain, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep quality, and social participation, to establish population norms. An MDHAQ (multidimensional health assessment questionnaire) scores these 7 domains and includes medical information such as a FAST4 (fibromyalgia assessment screening tool) index. We analyzed PROMIS-29 T-scores in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients vs population norms and for positive vs negative fibromyalgia (FM) screens and compared PROMIS-29 T-scores to MDHAQ scores to assess HRQL. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed at one routine visit of 213 RA patients, who completed MDHAQ, PROMIS-29, and reference 2011 FM Criteria. PROMIS-29 T-scores were compared in RA vs population norms and in FM+ vs FM- RA patients, based on MDHAQ/FAST4 and reference criteria. Possible associations between PROMIS-29 T-scores and corresponding MDHAQ scores were analyzed using Spearman correlations and multiple regressions. RESULTS: Median PROMIS-29 T-scores indicated clinically and statistically significantly poorer status in 26-29% FM+ vs FM- RA patients, with larger differences than in RA patients vs population norms for 6/7 domains. MDHAQ scores were correlated significantly with each of 7 corresponding PROMIS-29 domains (|rho|≥0.62, p<0.001). Linear regressions explained 55-73% of PROMIS-29 T-score variation by MDHAQ scores and 56%-70% of MDHAQ score variation by PROMIS-29 T-scores. CONCLUSIONS: Scores for 7 PROMIS-29 domains and MDHAQ were highly correlated. The MDHAQ is effective to assess HRQL and offers incremental medical information, including FAST4 screening. The results indicate the importance of assessing comorbidities such as fibromyalgia screening in interpreting PROMIS-29 T-scores.

RheuMetric Quantitative 0 to 10 Physician Estimates of Inflammation, Damage, and Distress in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Validation Against Reference Measures.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze a RheuMetric checklist, which includes four feasible physician 0 to 10 scores for DOCGL, inflammation (DOCINF), damage (DOCDAM), and distress (DOCSTR) for criterion and discriminant validity against standard reference measures. METHODS: A prospective, cross-sectional assessment was performed at one routine care visit at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Rheumatologists recorded DOCGL, DOCINF, DOCDAM, DOCSTR, and 28 joint counts for swelling (SJC), tenderness (TJC), and limited motion/deformity (DJC). Patients completed a multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ), which includes routine assessment of patient index data (RAPID3), fibromyalgia assessment screening tool (FAST4), and MDHAQ depression screen (MDS2). Laboratory tests and radiographic scores were recorded. RheuMetric estimates of inflammation, damage, and distress were compared with reference and other measures using correlations and linear regressions. RESULTS: In 173 patients with RA, variation in RheuMetric DOCINF was explained significantly by SJC and inversely by disease duration; variation in DOCDAM was explained significantly by DJC, radiographic scores, and physical function; and variation in DOCSTR was explained significantly by fibromyalgia and depression. CONCLUSION: RheuMetric DOCINF, DOCDAM, and DOCSTR estimates were correlated significantly and specifically with reference measures of inflammation, damage, and distress, documenting criterion and discriminant validity.

Knee osteoarthritis patient perspectives of their care in an australian private physiotherapy setting: a qualitative exploratory interview study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand perceptions that knee osteoarthritis patients have regarding their experiences of guideline-based recommendations within their care received from physiotherapists in private practice. METHODS: A qualitative semi-structured interview study nested within a larger trial auditing care provided by physiotherapists. Recruited adults ≥ 45 years with knee osteoarthritis across nine primary care physiotherapy practices. Interview questions were anchored around the core elements recommended in guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis and patient perceptions of these were analysed using both content and thematic qualitative analysis approaches. Patient satisfaction with care received was asked at the time of interview. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients volunteered for the study (mean 60 years, 58% female). Analysis identified that physiotherapists focused on treating symptoms through quadriceps strengthening exercises, which patients found to be effective, though focussed less on other aspects of evidenced-based care. Patient's perceived treatment to be effective in relieving pain and enabling them to stay active and they appreciated the positive role that their physiotherapist provided in alleviating their concerns. Overall, patients were satisfied with their physiotherapy care but would have liked more specific osteoarthritis education and longer-term management. CONCLUSION: The description of the physiotherapy-related care received by people with knee osteoarthritis aligns with guideline recommendations, though mainly for strength-related exercise prescription. Despite some perceived shortfalls in care, patients do appear to be satisfied. However, improvements in patient outcomes may be possible if more elements of guideline-base care are regularly provided, including enhancing osteoarthritis education and fostering behaviour change. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620000188932.

Comparative Effectiveness of First-Line Baricitinib in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis in the Australian OPAL Data Set.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze comparative treatment persistence for first-line baricitinib (BARI) versus first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and for first-line BARI initiated as monotherapy versus first-line BARI initiated with at least one conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD). METHODS: Patients with RA who initiated BARI or TNFi as first-line biologic or targeted synthetic DMARD from October 1, 2015, to September 30, 2021, were identified in the OPAL data set. Drug survival times to 6, 12, and 24 months were analyzed using restricted mean survival time (RMST). Multiple imputation and inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to address missing data and nonrandom treatment assignment. RESULTS: A total of 545 patients initiated first-line BARI, including 118 as monotherapy and 427 as csDMARD combination therapy. Three thousand five hundred patients initiated first-line TNFi. There was no difference in drug survival to 6 or 12 months for BARI compared with TNFi; differences in RMST were 0.02 months (95% CI: -0.08 to 0.013; P = 0.65) and 0.31 months (95% CI: -0.02 to 0.63; P = 0.06), respectively. Patients in the BARI group had 1.00 month (95% CI: 0.14 to 1.86; P = 0.02) longer drug survival to 24 months. There was no difference in drug survival for BARI monotherapy compared with combination therapy, with differences in RMST to 6, 12, and 24 months of -0.19 months (95% CI: -0.50 to 0.12; P = 0.12), -0.35 months (95% CI: -1.17 to 0.42; P = 0.41), and -0.56 months (95% CI: -2.66 to 1.54; P = 0.60), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this comparative analysis, treatment persistence up to 24 months was significantly longer for first-line BARI compared with TNFi, but the effect size of 1.00 month is not clinically meaningful. There was no difference in persistence for BARI monotherapy versus combination therapy.

Patient global assessment is elevated by up to 5 of 10 units in patients with inflammatory arthritis who screen positive for fibromyalgia (by FAST4) and/or depression (by MDS2) on a single MDHAQ.

BACKGROUND: Patient global assessment (PATGL) is a component of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) activity indices, reflecting inflammation in selected clinical trial patients. In routine care, PATGL often may be elevated independently of inflammatory activity by fibromyalgia (FM) and/or depression, leading to complexities in interpretation. A feasible method to screen for FM and/or depression could help to clarify interpretation of high PATGL and index scores, including explanation of apparent limited responses to anti-inflammatory therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with RA or SpA in routine care in Barcelona, Chicago, and Sydney complete a 2-page multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) in 5-10 min. The MDHAQ includes PATGL and three indices, RAPID3 (routine assessment of patient index data) to assess clinical status, FAST4 (0-4 fibromyalgia assessment screening tool) and MDS2 (0-2 MDHAQ depression screen). PATGL was compared for each diagnosis at each site and pooled data in FAST4 positive (+) vs negative (-) and/or MDS2+ vs MDS2- patients using medians and median regressions. RESULTS: Median PATGL was 5.0 in 393 RA and 175 SpA patients; 2.0-3.0 in 305 (58.9%) FAST4-,MDS2- patients, 5.5-6.0 in 71 (13.7%) FAST4-,MDS2+ patients, 7.0-7.5 in 50 (9.7%) FAST4+,MDS2- patients, and 7.0-8.0 in 92 (17.8%) FAST4+,MDS2+ patients. Positive FAST4 and/or MDS2 screens were seen in 41% of patients. Results were similar in RA and SpA at 3 settings on 3 continents. CONCLUSION: Median 0-10 PATGL varied from 2-3/10 to 5.5-8/10, according to negative vs positive screening for FM and/or depression on a single MDHAQ for busy clinical settings.

Association of Modified Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index Attainment With Long-Term Clinical Outcomes: A Five-Year Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: In trials of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), the SLE Responder Index (SRI) is the most commonly used primary efficacy end point but has limited validation against long-term outcomes. We aimed to investigate associations of attainment of a modified version of the SRI (mSRI) with key clinical outcomes in SLE patients with up to 5 years of follow-up. METHODS: We used data from a large multicenter, longitudinal SLE cohort in which patients received standard of care. The first visit with active disease (defined as SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 [SLEDAI-2K] score ≥6) was designated as baseline, and mSRI attainment (defined as a reduction in SLEDAI-2K ≥4 points with no worsening in physician global assessment ≥0.3 points) was determined at annual intervals from baseline up to 5 years. Associations between mSRI attainment and outcomes including disease activity, glucocorticoid dose, flare, damage accrual, Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS), and remission were studied. RESULTS: We included 2,060 patients, with a median baseline SLEDAI-2K score of 8. An mSRI response was attained by 56% of patients at 1 year, with similar responder rates seen at subsequent annual time points. Compared to nonresponders, mSRI responders had significantly lower disease activity and prednisolone dose and higher proportions of LLDAS and remission attainment at each year, and less damage accrual at years 2 and 3. Furthermore, mSRI responder status at 1 year predicted clinical benefit at subsequent years across most outcomes, including damage accrual (odds ratio [OR] range 0.58-0.69, P < 0.05 for damage accrual ORs at all time points). CONCLUSION: In SLE patients with active disease receiving standard of care, mSRI attainment predicts favorable outcomes over long-term follow-up, supporting the clinical meaningfulness of SRI attainment as an SLE trial end point.

'Not at target': prevalence and consequences of inadequate disease control in systemic lupus erythematosus-a multinational observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The unmet need in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with the current standard of care is widely recognised, but few studies have quantified this. The recent definition of treat-to-target endpoints and other thresholds of uncontrolled disease activity provide an opportunity to formally define unmet need in SLE. In this study, we enumerated the prevalence of these states and examined their association with adverse outcomes. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively in a 13-country longitudinal SLE cohort between 2013 and 2019. Unmet need was defined as never attaining lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS), a time-adjusted mean SLEDAI-2K (AMS) > 4, or ever experiencing high disease activity status (HDAS; SLEDAI-2K ≥10). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using SF36 (v2) and damage accrual using the SLICC-ACR SLE Damage Index (SDI). RESULTS: A total of 3384 SLE patients were followed over 30,313 visits (median [IQR] follow-up 2.4 [0.4, 4.3] years). Eight hundred thirteen patients (24%) never achieved LLDAS. Median AMS was 3.0 [1.4, 4.9]; 34% of patients had AMS > 4. Twenty-five per cent of patients had episodes of HDAS. Each of LLDAS-never, AMS>4, and HDAS-ever was strongly associated with damage accrual, higher glucocorticoid use, and worse HRQoL. Mortality was significantly increased in LLDAS-never (adjusted HR [95% CI] = 4.98 [2.07, 12.0], p<0.001) and HDAS-ever (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) [95% CI] = 5.45 [2.75, 10.8], p<0.001) patients. CONCLUSION: Failure to achieve LLDAS, high average disease activity, and episodes of HDAS were prevalent in SLE and were significantly associated with poor outcomes including organ damage, glucocorticoid exposure, poor quality of life, and mortality.

Computer-Based Decision Tools for Shared Therapeutic Decision-making in Oncology: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic decision-making in oncology is a complex process because physicians must consider many forms of medical data and protocols. Another challenge for physicians is to clearly communicate their decision-making process to patients to ensure informed consent. Computer-based decision tools have the potential to play a valuable role in supporting this process. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to investigate the extent to which computer-based decision tools have been successfully adopted in oncology consultations to improve patient-physician joint therapeutic decision-making. METHODS: This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 checklist and guidelines. A literature search was conducted on February 4, 2021, across the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (from 2005 to January 28, 2021), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (December 2020), MEDLINE (from 1946 to February 4, 2021), Embase (from 1947 to February 4, 2021), Web of Science (from 1900 to 2021), Scopus (from 1969 to 2021), and PubMed (from 1991 to 2021). We used a snowball approach to identify additional studies by searching the reference lists of the studies included for full-text review. Additional supplementary searches of relevant journals and gray literature websites were conducted. The reviewers screened the articles eligible for review for quality and inclusion before data extraction. RESULTS: There are relatively few studies looking at the use of computer-based decision tools in oncology consultations. Of the 4431 unique articles obtained from the searches, only 10 (0.22%) satisfied the selection criteria. From the 10 selected studies, 8 computer-based decision tools were identified. Of the 10 studies, 6 (60%) were conducted in the United States. Communication and information-sharing were improved between physicians and patients. However, physicians did not change their habits to take advantage of computer-assisted decision-making tools or the information they provide. On average, the use of these computer-based decision tools added approximately 5 minutes to the total length of consultations. In addition, some physicians felt that the technology increased patients' anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 10 selected studies, 6 (60%) demonstrated positive outcomes, 1 (10%) showed negative results, and 3 (30%) were neutral. Adoption of computer-based decision tools during oncology consultations continues to be low. This review shows that information-sharing and communication between physicians and patients can be improved with the assistance of technology. However, the lack of integration with electronic health records is a barrier. This review provides key requirements for enhancing the chance of success of future computer-based decision tools. However, it does not show the effects of health care policies, regulations, or business administration on physicians' propensity to adopt the technology. Nevertheless, it is important that future research address the influence of these higher-level factors as well. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021226087; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021226087.

Identifying co-morbid fibromyalgia in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus using the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: Fibromyalgia (FM) is prevalent but often under-recognized in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) can identify co-morbid FM in patients with rheumatic diseases. The present study examined the utility of the MDHAQ in recognizing FM in patients with SLE during routine consultations. METHODS: Patients with SLE completed an MDHAQ. FM status was determined by the validated 2016 revision of the ACR 2010/2011 preliminary FM criteria. Individual PROs from the MDHAQ and composite Fibromyalgia Assessment Tool (FAST) indices of the discriminatory PROs were compared between patients with and without FM using Student's unpaired t-test and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to determine the area under the curve (AUC). The physician's clinical impression of FM was recorded, and the SLE Disease Activity Index was used to assess disease activity. RESULTS: Of 88 patients with SLE, 23 (26%) satisfied the 2016 FM criteria. The FAST3 composite measure of two out of three of pain (≥6/10), joint count (≥16/48) and symptom checklist (≥16/60) correctly classified 89% of patients (AUC=0.90, kappa=0.71). Physician diagnosis demonstrated moderate agreement with the 2016 FM criteria (kappa=0.43) but missed 43% of patients with FM. In the presence of active disease, the FAST3 correctly classified 91% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Co-morbid FM is prevalent in SLE yet often underdiagnosed by physicians. The simple FAST3 index of the MDHAQ provides an easy-to-use self-reported tool to improve identification of FM in patients with SLE.

Elevating the role of carers in rheumatoid arthritis management in the Asia-Pacific region.

AIM: Carers may offer valuable insight into the true health status of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This multinational, multi-stakeholder, exploratory study in Australia, China and Japan aimed to enrich our understanding of the role and potential impact of carers on RA management. METHOD: This study used a 2-phase sequential mixed methods approach involving 3 key stakeholder groups: rheumatologists, RA patients and carers. The first phase involved an in-depth qualitative exploratory survey (n = 30), which informed the development of the subsequent quantitative validation survey (n = 908). In both phases, patients and carers provided self-assessments of disease and support parameters. RESULTS: In the qualitative phase, patients usually understated the amount of physical support required, compared to carers. Rheumatologists underestimated the amount of physical and emotional care required, compared to carers and patients; however, in the quantitative phase, rheumatologists overestimated the level of support provided by carers. Levels of support provided by carers increased as disease severity increased. Active participation of carers in clinical consultations and treatment decision-making was deemed important by 55% of all patients and 82% of all carers. All stakeholders believed carers' insights into the physical and emotional conditions of patients were useful and should be considered in clinical decision-making. Over 95% of rheumatologists reported soliciting input from the carer. CONCLUSION: Carers provide valuable input that can give clinicians greater insight into the patients' physical and emotional states, and treatment adherence. Development of standardized carer-reported outcomes that correlate with patient-reported outcomes and clinical parameters will ensure clinical meaningfulness and external validity.

Fibromyalgia Assessment Screening Tool: Clues to Fibromyalgia on a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire for Routine Care.

OBJECTIVE: To develop feasible indices as clues to comorbid fibromyalgia (FM) in routine care of patients with various rheumatic diseases based only on self-report multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) scores, which are informative in all rheumatic diagnoses studied. METHODS: All patients with all diagnoses complete an MDHAQ at each visit; the 2011 FM criteria questionnaire was added to the standard MDHAQ between February 2013 and August 2016. The proportion of patients who met 2011 FM criteria or had a clinical diagnosis of FM was calculated. Individual candidate MDHAQ measures were compared to 2011 FM criteria using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves; cutpoints to recognize FM were selected from the area under the curve (AUC) for optimal tradeoff between sensitivity and specificity. Cumulative indices of 3 or 4 MDHAQ measures were analyzed as fibromyalgia assessment screening tools (FAST). RESULTS: In 148 patients, the highest AUC in ROC analyses versus 2011 FM criteria were seen for MDHAQ symptom checklist, self-report painful joint count, pain visual analog scale (VAS), and fatigue VAS. The optimal cutpoints were ≥ 16/60 for symptom checklist, ≥ 16/48 for self-report painful joint count, and ≥ 6/10 for both pain and fatigue VAS. Cumulative FAST indices of 2/3 or 3/4 MDHAQ measures correctly classified 89.4-91.7% of patients who met 2011 FM criteria. CONCLUSION: FAST3 and FAST4 cumulative indices from only MDHAQ scores correctly identify most patients who meet 2011 FM criteria. FAST indices can assist clinicians in routine care as clues to FM with a general rheumatology rather than FM-specific questionnaire.

Osteoarthritis is as severe as rheumatoid arthritis: evidence over 40 years according to the same measure in each disease.

Osteoarthritis (OA) may be associated with substantial work disability, morbidity, costs, and increased mortality rates, often similar to rheumatoid arthritis (RA), documented in many published reports over the last 4 decades. However, OA generally has been viewed as less severe than RA. This discrepancy may be explained in part by:a) RA may have been considerably more severe in the past, prior to effective therapies.b) most older individuals have radiographic joint damage, which often is not associated with clinical symptoms.c) RA is associated with abnormal laboratory tests, which are regarded as conveying greater significance than symptoms of pain and disability according to a "biomedical model," the dominant paradigm of modern medicine.d) Most reports of OA and RA have emphasised differences between the 2 diseases even beyond laboratory abnormalities in pathogenesis, physical findings, and imaging.e) Even pain and functional disability seen in both diseases are assessed using different patient self-report questionnaires, a WOMAC (Western Ontario McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index) in OA, and HAQ (health assessment questionnaire) in RA.An identical measure is required for optimal direct comparisons, which has been used in 8 studies performed between 1979 and 2019 at 8 sites in North America, Europe, and Australia. These studies were primarily based on retrospective analyses at sites which collected a patient questionnaire in routine clinical care by all patients at all visits to inform clinical decisions. A pain visual analogue scale (VAS) was higher in OA compared to RA in 11/12 patient groups, while physical function on a HAQ (health assessment questionnaire) or derivative MDHAQ (multidimensional HAQ) and RAPID3 (routine assessment of patient index data) were slightly higher in RA before 2013 and higher in OA in later reports. Furthermore, a study of population-based data from the 1978 US Health Interview Survey indicated similar levels of disability and earnings losses according to surrogate variables for OA and RA. Therefore, at least over the last 40 years, pain and functional disability in OA have appeared to be severe and similar to RA. These observations also-illustrate the potential value of using an identical patient questionnaire in all patients at all visits in routine care settings, analogous to using the same laboratory tests such as erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) or C-reactive protein (CRP) in all rheumatic diseases, and maintaining a database of the results for later analyses.

Diagnosis of Fibromyalgia: Disagreement Between Fibromyalgia Criteria and Clinician-Based Fibromyalgia Diagnosis in a University Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have suggested that fibromyalgia is inaccurately diagnosed in the community, and that ~75% of persons reporting a physician diagnosis of fibromyalgia would not satisfy published criteria. To investigate possible diagnostic misclassification, we compared expert physician diagnosis with published criteria. METHODS: In a university rheumatology clinic, 497 patients completed the Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MD-HAQ) and the 2010 American College of Rheumatology preliminary diagnostic criteria modified for self-administration during their ordinary medical visits. Patients were evaluated and diagnosed by university rheumatology staff. RESULTS: Of the 497 patients, 121 (24.3%) satisfied the fibromyalgia criteria, while 104 (20.9%) received a clinician International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnosis of fibromyalgia. The agreement between clinicians and criteria was 79.2%. However, agreement beyond chance was only fair (κ = 0.41). Physicians failed to identify 60 criteria-positive patients (49.6%) and incorrectly identified 43 criteria-negative patients (11.4%). In a subset of 88 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the kappa value was 0.32, indicating slight to fair agreement. Universally, higher polysymptomatic distress scores and criteria-based diagnosis were associated with more abnormal MD-HAQ clinical scores. Women and patients with more symptoms but fewer pain areas were more likely to receive a clinician's diagnosis than to satisfy fibromyalgia criteria. CONCLUSION: There is considerable disagreement between ICD clinical diagnosis and criteria-based diagnosis of fibromyalgia, calling into question ICD-based studies. Fibromyalgia criteria were easy to use, but problems regarding clinician bias, meaning of a fibromyalgia diagnosis, and the validity of physician diagnosis were substantial.

Adherence to recommended electronic health record safety practices across eight health care organizations.

Objective: The Safety Assurance Factors for EHR Resilience (SAFER) guides were released in 2014 to help health systems conduct proactive risk assessment of electronic health record (EHR)- safety related policies, processes, procedures, and configurations. The extent to which SAFER recommendations are followed is unknown. Methods: We conducted risk assessments of 8 organizations of varying size, complexity, EHR, and EHR adoption maturity. Each organization self-assessed adherence to all 140 unique SAFER recommendations contained within 9 guides (range 10-29 recommendations per guide). In each guide, recommendations were organized into 3 broad domains: "safe health IT" (total 45 recommendations); "using health IT safely" (total 80 recommendations); and "monitoring health IT" (total 15 recommendations). Results: The 8 sites fully implemented 25 of 140 (18%) SAFER recommendations. Mean number of "fully implemented" recommendations per guide ranged from 94% (System Interfaces-18 recommendations) to 63% (Clinical Communication-12 recommendations). Adherence was higher for "safe health IT" domain (82.1%) vs "using health IT safely" (72.5%) and "monitoring health IT" (67.3%). Conclusions: Despite availability of recommendations on how to improve use of EHRs, most recommendations were not fully implemented. New national policy initiatives are needed to stimulate implementation of these best practices.

MDHAQ/RAPID3 scores in patients with osteoarthritis are similar to or higher than in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional study from current routine rheumatology care at four sites.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) versus rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for scores on a patient self-report MDHAQ/RAPID3 (Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire/Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3), and for physician global assessment (DOCGL). METHODS: All patients with all diagnoses complete an MDHAQ/RAPID3 at all routine rheumatology visits in the waiting area before seeing a rheumatologist at four sites, one in Australia and three in the USA. The two-page MDHAQ includes 0-10 scores for physical function (in 10 activities), pain and patient global assessment [on 0-10 visual analogue scales (VAS)], compiled into a 0-30 RAPID3, as well as fatigue and self-report painful joint count scales. Rheumatologists estimate a 0-10 DOCGL VAS. Demographic, MDHAQ/RAPID3 and DOCGL data from a random visit were compared in patients with RA versus patients with OA using multivariate analysis of variance, adjusted for age, disease duration and formal education level. RESULTS: Median RAPID3 was higher in OA versus RA at all four sites (11.7-16.8 vs 6.2-11.8) (p<0.001 at three sites). Median DOCGL in OA versus RA was 5 vs 4, 4 vs 3.7, 2.2 vs 2.5 and 2 vs 1. Patterns were similar for individual RAPID3 items, fatigue and painful joint scales, and in stratified analyses of patients aged 55-70. CONCLUSION: Patient MDHAQ/RAPID3 and physician DOCGL indicate similar or higher disease burden in OA versus RA. Routine MDHAQ/RAPID3 allows direct comparisons of the two diseases. The findings suggest possible revision of current clinical and public policy views concerning OA.

Pain and other self-report scores in patients with osteoarthritis indicate generally similar disease burden to patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Osteoarthritis (OA) is regarded as a less severe form of arthritis than rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by health professionals and the general public, based largely on laboratory findings of autoantibodies and acute phase reactants. Relatively few studies have reported data from the patient's perspective to compare directly OA versus RA using the same self-report questionnaire measure. We aimed to summarise reports that compare OA versus RA patient pain scores and other indicators of disease burden according to the same self-report questionnaire. METHODS: A retrospective review identified 5 published reports at 8 rheumatology sites in 4 countries from 1989 to 2017 in which patients with OA versus RA completed the same patient self-report questionnaire for pain and other variables. Most comparisons involved a health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) and derivative multidimensional HAQ (MDHAQ), which include physical function, pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and patient global assessment VAS. Other questionnaires were included in one or two reported studies. RESULTS: Mean or median pain VAS was in a similar range in OA versus RA, though somewhat higher in OA at 7 of 8 sites studied (included in 1989). Physical function and other scores also were in a similar range for RA versus OA. Evidence of higher scores for physical function in RA relative to OA in earlier than more recent studies was seen, although all studies indicated a clinically important disease burden in OA. CONCLUSIONS: OA presents a severe disease burden to patients, which appears similar to RA. The findings suggest revision of current clinical and public policy views concerning OA.

RheuMetric A Physician Checklist to Record Patient Levels of Inflammation, Damage and Distress as Quantitative Data Rather than as Narrative Impressions.

BACKGROUND: A physician global estimate of patient status (DOCGL) was designed to quantitate inflammatory activity but may be influenced by the presence of damage and distress. Therefore, three additional 0 to 10 visual analog scales (VAS) have been developed on a RheuMetric checklist to record physician estimates of inflammation (DOCINF), damage (DOCDAM), and distress (DOCSTR) (such as fibromyalgia and somatization). We analyzed patient scores on a multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) and four RheuMetric physician estimates inpatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), osteoarthritis (OA), and fibromyalgia (FM). METHODS: All patients with all diagnoses seen by Rush University Medical Center rheumatologists complete an MDHAQ and have four RheuMetric 0 to 10 VAS estimates for DOCGL, DOCINF, DOCDAM, and DOCSTR assigned by the rheumatologist at each visit. A random visit of 205 patients with RA (N = 50), OA (N = 67), SLE (N = 66), and FM (N = 32) was analyzed for mean MDHAQ scores, RheuMetric estimates, and Spearman correlations. RESULTS: Mean MDHAQ scores and DOCGL were highest for FM, followed by OA, RA, and SLE. Highest estimates and highest correlations with DOCGL were seen for DOCINF in RA, for DOCDAM in OA, and for DOCSTR in FM. DOCDAM estimates were higher than DOCINF in RA and SLE, suggesting that damage may be as severe a clinical problem as inflammation. DOCGL was correlated significantly with patient global estimate (PATGL) in RA, SLE, and OA, but not in FM. CONCLUSIONS: Physician estimates for inflammation, damage,and distress differ in different rheumatic diagnoses. Many patients have inflammation and damage or distress, or all three problems, reflecting challenges of rheumatology care.