Assistive devices: an effective strategy in non-pharmacological treatment for hand osteoarthritis-randomized clinical trial.

This study aims to evaluate the use of assistive devices as a strategy in non-pharmacological treatment for hand osteoarthritis (HOA). This is a randomized, prospective, parallel, assessor-blinded clinical trial, in which patients with a diagnosis of HOA were randomly allocated to an intervention group (IG), where they received assistive devices for daily life activities, or to a control group (CG), where they received a guideline leaflet with information on joint protection and disease features. The primary outcomes considered were occupational performance, measured by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), and hand function was evaluated through the Score for the Assessment and Quantification of Chronic Rheumatoid Affections of the Hands (SACRAH). The secondary outcomes were pain, measured by the visual analog scale (VAS), and quality of life, measured by the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument, Short Form (WHOQOL-BREF). We compared both outcomes before and after interventions and outcomes between groups. Participants from the two groups were assessed at the time of inclusion in the study, 30, and 90 days after initial evaluation. Out of the 39 patients included, 19 were allocated to the IG and 20 to the CG. Only two patients from the CG did not complete the follow-up period. The patients' hand function and occupational performance improved after intervention (30 days-SACRAH-p < 0.05; COPM-p < 0.05; VAS-p < 0.05). When comparing results between the groups, there was a statistical difference in COPM (performance-p < 0.001; and satisfaction-p < 0.001), in the first reevaluation carried out. The use of assistive devices has proved to be an effective alternative in non-pharmacological treatment for HOA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02667145.

Validation of the Spanish, Portuguese and French versions of the Lupus Damage Index questionnaire: data from North and South America, Spain and Portugal.

We have previously developed and validated a self-administered questionnaire, modelled after the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Damage Index (SDI), the Lupus Damage Index Questionnaire (LDIQ), which may allow the ascertainment of this construct in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients followed in the community and thus expand observations made about damage. We have now translated, back-translated and adapted the LDIQ to Spanish, Portuguese and French and applied it to patients followed at academic and non-academic centres in North and South America, Portugal and Spain while their physicians scored the SDI. A total of 887 patients (659 Spanish-speaking, 140 Portuguese-speaking and 80 French-speaking patients) and 40 physicians participated. Overall, patients scored all LDIQ versions higher than their physicians (total score and all domains). Infrequent manifestations had less optimal clinimetric properties but overall agreement was more than 95% for the majority of items. Higher correlations were observed among the Spanish-speaking patients than the Portuguese-speaking and French-speaking patients; further adjustments may be needed before the Portuguese and French versions of the LDIQ are applied in community-based studies. The relationship between the LDIQ and other outcome parameters is currently being investigated in a different patient sample.