Variability in the frequency of rheumatology consultations in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Spain.

The aim of this work was to assess the variability in the use of health-care resources, based on the number of visits to rheumatology departments by rheumatoid arthritis patients, in Spain, and its association with patient, physician and center characteristics. The sample consisted of patient records of men and women (aged 16 or older), with a clinical diagnosis of RA, who met the American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria and who had been treated in a rheumatology department at a Spanish hospital with at least one visit to a rheumatologist during the two years preceding the date of the study. To analyze which variables were independently associated with the number of consultations, those with a statistically significant result in the bivariate analysis, or which were clinically relevant or deemed confounders, were used in the construction of a linear regression model. The records of 1188 RA patients were studied. The linear regression model explained the 26.67 % of the variability in the number of visits. The number of csDMARDs prescribed, the administration of biological therapy, corticoid prescription, the presence of nursing consultation, mean time to first visit in the department and attended population showed a positive significant association, while the presence of telephone consultation, distance from the hospital to the patient´s residence (≥20 km) and drug monitoring by rheumatology department + primary care physician or by other specialists were negatively associated with the number of consultations. We observed a high variability in the number of visits, which remains partially unexplained even after taking into account individual, physician and center characteristics.

Multinational evidence-based recommendations on how to investigate and follow-up undifferentiated peripheral inflammatory arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad international panel of rheumatologists in the 3E Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations on how to investigate and follow-up undifferentiated peripheral inflammatory arthritis (UPIA). METHODS: 697 rheumatologists from 17 countries participated in the 3E (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative of 2008-9 consisting of three separate rounds of discussions and modified Delphi votes. In the first round 10 clinical questions were selected. A bibliographic team systematically searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and ACR/EULAR 2007-2008 meeting abstracts. Relevant articles were reviewed for quality assessment, data extraction and synthesis. In the second round each country elaborated a set of national recommendations. Finally, multinational recommendations were formulated and agreement among the participants and the potential impact on their clinical practice was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 39,756 references were identified, of which 250 were systematically reviewed. Ten multinational key recommendations about the investigation and follow-up of UPIA were formulated. One recommendation addressed differential diagnosis and investigations prior to establishing the operational diagnosis of UPIA, seven recommendations related to the diagnostic and prognostic value of clinical and laboratory assessments in established UPIA (history and physical examination, acute phase reactants, autoantibodies, radiographs, MRI and ultrasound, genetic markers and synovial biopsy), one recommendation highlighted predictors of persistence (chronicity) and the final recommendation addressed monitoring of clinical disease activity in UPIA. CONCLUSIONS: Ten recommendations on how to investigate and follow-up UPIA in the clinical setting were developed. They are evidence-based and supported by a large panel of rheumatologists, thus enhancing their validity and practical use.

Current therapy of lupus nephritis. Which is the best option?

Renal involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality, reaching a prevalence of 39% during the course of the disease. Currently, the therapy for severe lupus nephritis is based on the use of high-dose corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs, being traditionally cyclophosphamide the most frequently used agent. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil as induction therapy for lupus nephritis. Azathioprine, a safe drug during pregnancy, has not been demonstrated to be as effective as mycophenolate or cyclophosphamide as induction therapy, although it is an effective drug for maintenance of remission.

Current therapy of lupus nephritis. Which is the best option?

La afectación renal en el lupus eritematoso sistémico (LES) es una causa importante de morbilidad y mortalidad, llegando a afectar hasta al 39% de los pacientes diagnosticados de LES durante su evolución. Actualmente, el tratamiento de la nefritis lúpica grave se basa en el uso de dosis altas de corticosteroides y fármacos inmunosupresores, de entre los cuales, tradicionalmente, la ciclofosfamida ha sido el más utilizado. Estudios recientes han demostrado la eficacia del micofenolato de mofetilo como terapia de inducción para la nefritis lúpica. La azatioprina, de uso seguro durante la gestación, no ha demostrado ser tan eficaz como el micofenolato o la ciclofosfamida como terapia de inducción, aunque sí ha resultado ser efectiva para el mantenimiento de la remisión

Renal involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality, reaching a prevalence of 39% during the course of the disease. Currently, the therapy for severe lupus nephritis is based on the use of high-dose corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs, being traditionally cyclophosphamide the most frequently used agent. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil as induction therapy for lupus nephritis. Azathioprine, a safe drug during pregnancy, has not been demonstrated to be as effective as mycophenolate or cyclophosphamide as induction therapy, although it is an effective drug for maintenance of remission (AU)

Hombro doloroso en paciente sometida a diálisis peritoneal / Painful shoulder in patient undergoing peritoneal dialysis

No disponible