Patient and clinician views on an app for rheumatoid arthritis disease monitoring: Function, implementation and implications.

AIM: Best practice management for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) involves regular clinical assessment of RA disease activity. This is not achievable with current rheumatology systems of care. We aimed to use opinions from people with RA and their specialist rheumatology healthcare professionals to inform development of a mobile app for people with RA for recording their disease activity data for potential integration into clinical service, and assess usability of the app. METHOD: In phase 1 we interviewed nine people with RA and seven healthcare professionals. In phase 2 we developed an app with professional software developers. In phase 3 we evaluated app usability for people with RA using the System Usability Scale (SUS). RESULTS: Interview data showed four themes regarding functionality and implementation of a patient-held app in RA care: (a) variable app acceptance and readiness; (b) app use to reduce barriers; (c) pros and cons of patient-reported outcomes; and (d) allocation of clinics by need. The app developed has high usability in people with RA using the app on their own device for a month (SUS 79.5, n = 16) or using the app on a study device for 10 minutes (SUS 83, n = 100). CONCLUSION: People with RA and healthcare professionals have clearly identified features, benefits and risks of an app for self-assessment of RA and incorporation into clinical care. An app developed informed by these opinions has high usability. Next steps are development and validation of a method of patient-performed joint counts, and implementation, with evaluation, in the clinical setting.

Scoping review of priority setting of research topics for musculoskeletal conditions.

OBJECTIVE: Describe research methods used in priority-setting exercises for musculoskeletal conditions and synthesise the priorities identified. DESIGN: Scoping review. SETTING AND POPULATION: Studies that elicited the research priorities of patients/consumers, clinicians, researchers, policy-makers and/or funders for any musculoskeletal condition were included. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to November 2017 and the James Lind Alliance top 10 priorities, Cochrane Priority Setting Methods Group, and Cochrane Musculoskeletal and Back Groups review priority lists. The reported methods and research topics/questions identified were extracted, and a descriptive synthesis conducted. RESULTS: Forty-nine articles fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Methodologies and stakeholders varied widely (26 included a mix of clinicians, consumers and others, 16 included only clinicians, 6 included only consumers or patients and in 1 participants were unclear). Only two (4%) reported any explicit inclusion criteria for priorities. We identified 294 broad research priorities from 37 articles and 246 specific research questions from 17 articles, although only four (24%) of the latter listed questions in an actionable format. Research priorities for osteoarthritis were identified most often (n=7), followed by rheumatoid arthritis (n=4), osteoporosis (n=4) and back pain (n=4). Nearly half of both broad and specific research priorities were focused on treatment interventions (n=116 and 111, respectively), while few were economic (n=8, 2.7% broad and n=1, 0.4% specific), implementation (n=6, 2% broad and n=4, 1.6% specific) or health services and systems research (n=15, 5.1% broad and n=9, 3.7% specific) priorities. CONCLUSIONS: While many research priority-setting studies in the musculoskeletal field have been performed, methodological limitations and lack of actionable research questions limit their usefulness. Future studies should ensure they conform to good priority-setting practice to ensure that the generated priorities are of maximum value. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017059250.