Reviews for multimorbidity risk in people with inflammatory conditions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with inflammatory rheumatological conditions (IRCs) are at high risk of developing other conditions including cardiovascular disease and mood disorders. AIM: To explore perspectives of people with IRCs and healthcare practitioners (HCPs) on the content and delivery of a review consultation aimed at identification and management of multiple long-term conditions. DESIGN & SETTING: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with people with IRCs and HCPs. METHOD: People with IRCs participated in individual semi-structured interviews by telephone or online platform. HCPs (including primary and secondary care clinicians) participated in online focus groups. Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: 15 people with IRCs were interviewed; three focus groups with HCPs were conducted. Two main themes were identified: reflecting on the value of review consultations and what would a new review look like. Overall, people with IRCs and HCPs reflected that access to reviews is inequitable, leading to duplication of reviews and fragmentation in care. People with IRCs, at times, had difficulty conceptualising reviews, especially when discussing their future risk of conditions. People suggested that preparation before the healthcare review could align patient and HCP agendas as part of a flexible and person-centred discussion. CONCLUSION: Any review introduced for people with IRCs must move beyond a "tick-box" exercise. To gain maximum value from a review, preparation from both patient and HCP may be required alongside a person-centred approach whilst ensuring they are targeted at people most likely to benefit.

The information required by people with inflammatory arthritis to take methotrexate: a mixed-methods systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: This mixed-methods systematic review aimed to identify and synthesize knowledge of the characteristics, content, and preferred format of information to support people with inflammatory arthritis (IA) to take methotrexate. METHODS: A literature search using MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, GreyEU, Web of Science and Open Dissertation was conducted to identify all studies published from 2000 to December 2022. Included studies detailed factors related to methotrexate (MTX) related information needs of people with inflammatory arthritis ≥ 18 years in English. Joanna Briggs Institute Guidelines (JBI) for convergent integrated mixed-methods systematic reviews were followed using validated tools for data extraction and quality. Data was analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (seven quantitative, two mixed-methods and four qualitative) were included involving 3425 adults, mainly female n = 2434 (71%), age 20-84 years. An overarching theme of a requirement for person-centred care was developed with three interlinking themes: 1: Accepting the need for treatment with MTX, 2: Concerns about taking MTX, 3: A need for tailored information and support. Limitations of the evidence were use of heterogeneous outcome measures and instruments to measure information needs. CONCLUSION: People with IA have individual, multi-faceted information, and support needs about MTX that are often unresolved when a one-size-fits-all approach is used. The findings can inform rheumatology training to support a person-centred approach to identifying and addressing specific needs, concerns and the development of consistent easy-to-understand accessible MTX information.

Summarizing Evidence of Associations of COVID-19 With a Future Diagnosis of Inflammatory Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: A Rapid Review.

OBJECTIVE: Musculoskeletal symptoms are commonly reported following acute COVID-19. It is unclear whether those with musculoskeletal symptoms subsequently develop inflammatory rheumatic musculoskeletal disease (iRMD). This review seeks to identify evidence for an association between acute COVID-19 and subsequent iRMD diagnosis. METHODS: A rapid review of the literature using a systematic search of Medline, EMBASE and two COVID-19 databases was undertaken until August 2022. Case studies, case series, cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies reporting patients with an incident iRMD following COVID-19 were included. Title and abstract screening were conducted by one reviewer and full text screening by two reviewers. Data extraction and quality appraisal were by one reviewer, with a second verifying. Study-type specific critical appraisal tools were used. RESULTS: Results were narratively synthesized. A total of 80 studies were included (69 case reports, 10 case series and 1 cross-sectional study). Commonly reported iRMDs were "reactive arthropathies" (n = 47), "inflammatory arthropathies unspecified" (n = 18), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 12) and systemic lupus erythematosus (n = 11). The cross-sectional study reported 37% of those with COVID-19 developed "post COVID arthritis." Time from diagnosis of COVID-19 to iRMD presentation ranged from 0 to 120 days. Several mechanisms were proposed to explain the association between COVID-19 and iRMD development: autoimmune processes, aberrant inflammatory responses, colonization of joint spaces, direct damage from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus and genetic predisposition. CONCLUSION: The level of evidence of the studies included in this review was low and the quality generally poor. Prospective observational studies are required to confirm associations and likely impact of post COVID-19 iRMDs at a population level.

Analgesic prescribing in patients with inflammatory arthritis in England: observational studies in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVES: Despite little evidence that analgesics are effective in inflammatory arthritis (IA), studies report substantial opioid prescribing. The extent this applies to other analgesics is uncertain. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of analgesic prescribing in patients with IA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum to evaluate this. METHODS: From 2004 to 2020, cross-sectional analyses evaluated analgesic prescription annual prevalence in RA, PsA and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and geography. Joinpoint regression evaluated temporal prescribing trends. Cohort studies determined prognostic factors at diagnosis for chronic analgesic prescriptions using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Analgesic prescribing declined over time but remained common: 2004 and 2020 IA prescription prevalence was 84.2/100 person-years (PY) (95% CI 83.9, 84.5) and 64.5/100 PY (64.2, 64.8), respectively. In 2004, NSAIDs were most prescribed (56.1/100 PY; 55.8, 56.5), falling over time. Opioids were most prescribed in 2020 (39.0/100 PY; 38.7, 39.2). Gabapentinoid prescribing increased: 2004 prevalence 1.1/100 PY (1.0, 1.2); 2020 prevalence 9.9/100 PY (9.7, 10.0). Most opioid prescriptions were chronic (2020 prevalence 23.4/100 PY [23.2, 23.6]). Non-NSAID analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA, older people, females and deprived areas/northern England. Conversely, NSAID prescribing was commoner in axSpA/males, varying little by deprivation/geography. Peri-diagnosis was high-risk for starting chronic opioid/NSAID prescriptions. Prognostic factors for chronic opioid/gabapentinoid and NSAID prescriptions differed, with NSAIDs having no consistently significant association with deprivation (unlike opioids/gabapentinoids). CONCLUSION: IA analgesic prescribing of all classes is widespread. This is neither evidence-based nor in line with guidelines. Peri-diagnosis is an opportune moment to reduce chronic analgesic prescribing.

Exploring the longer-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health of people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the longer term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the self-reported physical and mental health of people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). METHODS: Two thousand twenty-four patients with IRDs were randomly selected from electronic health records. Survey invitations were sent (August 2021 coinciding with relaxation of UK COVID-19 restrictions) using SMS and postal approaches. Self-reported data included demographics, shielding status and physical (MSK-HQ) and mental health (PHQ8 and GAD7). RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-nine people completed the survey (mean (SD) age 64.5 (13.1) years, 384 (60%) female). Moderate/severe impact of the pandemic on physical and mental health was reported by 250 (41%) and 241 (39%) respectively. One hundred seventy-two (29%) reported moderate/severe depression (PHQ8 ≥ 10) and 135 (22%) moderate/severe anxiety (GAD7 ≥ 10). Females reported greater impacts of the pandemic on physical health (44% vs 34%), mental health (44% vs 34%), arthritis symptoms (49% vs 36%) and lifestyle factors (weight gain and reduced exercise and physical activity) than males. The physical and mental impacts were less in people with RA compared with other IRDs. Physical health impacts did not differ between age groups, but younger patients reported greater impacts on mental health. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the physical and mental health of people with IRDs. These effects were greatest in females. Recovery needs to address the negative impact of the pandemic on lifestyle factors to minimise the long-term impacts for people with IRDs. Key Points • The pandemic had a significant impact on long term physical and mental health in almost 40% of people with IRDs. • The impact of the pandemic was greater in women for physical health, mental health and arthritis symptoms. • Many people reported negative pandemic impacts on lifestyle factors including weight and physical activity.

Incorporating FRAX into a nurse-delivered integrated care review: a multi-method qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with inflammatory rheumatological conditions (IRCs) are at increased risk of common comorbidities including osteoporosis. AIM: To explore the barriers to and facilitators of implementing nurse-delivered fracture risk assessments in primary care, in the context of multimorbidity reviews for people with IRCs. DESIGN & SETTING: A multi-method qualitative study in primary care. METHOD: As part of a process evaluation in a pilot trial, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 patients, two nurses, and three GPs. Twenty-four patient-nurse INCLUDE review consultations were audiorecorded and transcribed. A framework analysis was conducted using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: Nurses reported positive views about the value of the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) and they felt confident to deliver the assessments following training. Barriers to implementation, as identified by TDF, particularly related to the domains of knowledge, skills, professional roles, and environmental context. GPs reported difficulty keeping up to date with osteoporosis guidelines and voiced differing opinions about whether fracture risk assessment was the role of primary or secondary care. Lack of integration of FRAX into IT systems was a barrier to use. GPs and nurses had differing views about the nurse role in communicating risk and acting on FRAX findings; for example, explanations of the FRAX result and action needed were limited. Patients reported limited understanding of FRAX outcomes. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that, with appropriate training including risk communication, practice nurses are likely to be confident to play a key role in conducting fracture risk assessments, but further work is needed to address the barriers identified.

Digital exclusion as a potential cause of inequalities in access to care: a survey in people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

Objectives: COVID-19 led to rapid uptake of digital health care. We sought to examine digital access, health and digital literacy, and impact on confidence and satisfaction with remote consultations in people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). Methods: People with IRDs (n = 2024) were identified from their electronic health record and invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey, using short message service (SMS) and postal approaches. Data were collected on demographics, self-reported diagnosis, access to and use of internet-enabled devices, health and digital literacy, together with confidence and satisfaction with remote consultations. Ethical approval was obtained (Ref 21/PR/0867). Results: Six hundred and thirty-nine (639) people completed the survey [mean (s.d.) age 64.5 (13.1) years, 384 (60.1%) female]. Two hundred and eighty-seven (44.9%) completed it online. One hundred and twenty-six (19.7%) people reported not having access to an internet-enabled device. Ninety-three (14.6%) reported never accessing the internet; this proportion was highest (23%) in people with RA. One hundred and seventeen (18%) reported limited health literacy. Even in those reporting internet use, digital literacy was only moderate. People with limited health or digital literacy or without internet access were less likely to report confidence or satisfaction with remote consultations. Conclusion: Limited health and digital literacy, lack of digital access and low reported internet use were common, especially in older people with RA. People with limited health literacy or limited digital access reported lower confidence and satisfaction with remote consultations. Digital implementation roll-out needs to take account of people requiring extra support to enable them to access care digitally or risks exacerbating health inequalities.

Implementation of physical activity interventions for people with inflammatory arthritis: an overview and future recommendations.

Regular physical activity is important for both physical and mental health. This is particularly important for people with inflammatory arthritis, because of the benefits on both disease-specific and systemic outcomes and the increased risk of comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease. Despite a wealth of evidence supporting physical activity interventions, there remains a significant gap in implementation into routine care. This overview describes what implementation is, examines why it is important to consider implementation approaches to improve uptake of physical activity, highlights factors that influence successful implementation using exemplars from both osteoarthritis and inflammatory arthritis and recommends where future research is needed.

Factors associated with change in health-related quality of life in people with gout: a 3-year prospective cohort study in primary care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe factors associated with change in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people living with gout in primary care. METHODS: In a UK prospective cohort study, adults with a diagnosis of gout registered with 20 general practices completed the Gout Impact Scale (GIS; scale 0-100), 36-item Short Form Physical Function subscale (PF-10; 0-100) and HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI; 0-3) via postal questionnaires at baseline and 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Linear mixed modelling was used to investigate factors associated with changes in HRQOL over 3 years. RESULTS: A total of 1184 participants responded at baseline (adjusted response 65.6%); 990 (83.6%) were male, with a mean age of 65.6 years (s.d. 12.5). A total of 818, 721, 696 and 605 responded at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. Factors associated with worse disease-specific and generic HRQOL over 3 years were flare frequency (five or more flares; GIS subscales, PF-10), oligo/polyarticular flares (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI), worse pain (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI), body pain (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI) and more severe depression (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI) (P ≤ 0.05). More severe anxiety was associated with worse disease-specific HRQOL only (GIS subscales). Older age (PF-10), being female (PF-10, HAQ-DI) and BMI (HAQ-DI) were associated with worse generic HRQOL (P ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: Gout-specific, comorbid and sociodemographic factors were associated with change in HRQOL over a 3-year period, highlighting people at risk of worse outcomes who could be targeted for interventions.

Rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis epidemiology in England from 2004 to 2020: An observational study using primary care electronic health record data.

Background: Contemporary data on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritits (SpA) epidemiology in England are lacking. This knowledge is crucial to planning healthcare services. We updated algorithms defining patients with diagnoses of RA, PsA, and axial SpA in primary care and applied them to describe their incidence and prevalence in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, an electronic health record (EHR) database covering ∼20% of England. Methods: Algorithms for ascertaining patients with RA, axial SpA, and PsA diagnoses validated in primary care EHR databases using Read codes were updated (to account for the English NHS change to SNOMED CT diagnosis coding) and applied. Updated diagnosis and synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug code lists were devised by rheumatologists and general practitioners. Annual incidence/point-prevalence of RA, PsA, and axial SpA diagnoses were calculated from 2004 to 2020 and stratified by age/sex. Findings: Point-prevalence of RA/PsA diagnoses increased annually, peaking in 2019 (RA 0·779% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·773, 0·784]; PsA 0·287% [95% CI 0·284, 0·291]) then falling slightly. Point-prevalence of axial SpA diagnoses increased annually (except in 2018/2019), peaking in 2020 (0·113% [95% CI 0·111, 0·115]). RA diagnosis annual incidence was higher between 2013-2019 (after inclusion in the Quality and Outcomes Framework, range 49·1 [95% CI 47·7, 50·5] to 52·1 [95% CI 50·6, 53·6]/100,000 person-years) than 2004-2012 (range 34·5 [95% CI 33·2, 35·7] to 40·0 [95% CI 38·6, 41·4]/100,000 person-years). Increases in the annual incidence of PsA/axial SpA diagnosis occurred following new classification criteria publication. Annual incidence of RA, PsA and axial SpA diagnoses fell by 40·1%, 67·4%, and 38·1%, respectively between 2019 and 2020, likely reflecting the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on their diagnosis. Interpretation: Recorded RA, PsA, and axial SpA diagnoses are increasingly prevalent in England, underlining the importance of organising healthcare services to provide timely, treat-to-target care to optimise the health of >1% of adults in England. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR300826).

The impact of polymyalgia rheumatica on intimate sexual relationships: findings from the PMR Cohort Study.

Objective: The aim was to determine the impact of PMR on intimate and sexual relationships over time. Methods: The PMR Cohort study is a longitudinal study of patients with incident PMR in English primary care. Participants were sent questionnaires about their PMR symptoms, treatments and overall health, including an item about how their PMR symptoms affected intimate and sexual relationships. The proportions reporting the relevance of intimate and sexual relationships, the effect of PMR on these relationships and the associations with PMR symptoms and general health were explored. Results: The baseline survey was completed by 652 of 739 patients (response 90.1%), with 446 of 576 (78.0%) responding at 2 years. The mean age of respondents was 72.4 years, and 62.2% were female. At baseline, 363 of 640 (56.7%) respondents reported that intimate and sexual relationships were not relevant to them. One hundred and thirteen of 277 (40.8%) respondents reported that PMR had a large effect on intimate relationships. This proportion decreased over time in those responding to 12- and 24-month surveys, but continued to be associated with younger age, male gender, worse PMR symptoms, poorer physical function and worse mental health. Conclusion: Intimate and sexual relationships are increasingly recognized as important for healthy ageing, and health professionals should consider this as part of a holistic approach to the management of PMR. Study registration: UKCRN ID16477.

Perceptions of risk in people with inflammatory arthritis during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: People with inflammatory arthritis have an increased incidence of serious illness and mortality, placing them at risk of poor outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study explored patients' perceptions of risk from COVID-19 over a longitudinal period of the pandemic. Methods: Fifteen adults with inflammatory arthritis attending a National Health Service rheumatology service each took part in three semi-structured telephone interviews conducted between 16 September 2020 and 29 July 2021. Interpretive phenomenological analysis was undertaken by two researchers and two public contributors. Results: Four main themes relating to perceptions of risk from COVID-19 were identified: inflammatory arthritis; medications and co-morbidities; immediate social environment; health policy communication; and media influence. Participants recognized that having inflammatory arthritis increased their individual risk. Perceptions of risk and associated fear increased during the pandemic, influenced by family/friends who had had COVID-19 and health policy communications. The perceived constant use of negative messages led to many participants disengaging with the media. At the final interviews, when the vaccination programme was well established, participants continued to assess the risk and benefits of engaging in activities. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the breadth of factors that influenced perceptions of risk in people with an inflammatory arthritis. As health professionals, we have only a small sphere of influence over some of these factors, namely health-care communications. People with inflammatory arthritis appropriately knew that their condition increased their infection risk, but more could be done to consider how and to what extent we involve patients in explaining risk at times of crisis.

Exploring the physical, psychological and social well-being of people with rheumatoid arthritis during the coronavirus pandemic: a single-centre, longitudinal, qualitative interview study in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune, inflammatory, systemic condition that requires specific drug treatment to suppress disease activity and prevent joint deformity. To manage the ongoing symptoms of joint pain and fatigue patients are encouraged to engage in self-management activities. People with RA have an increased incidence of serious illness and mortality, with the potential to impact on quality of life. This study explored patients' experiences of living with RA on physical, psychological and social well-being as well as their ability to employ self-management skills during the coronavirus pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative, longitudinal (baseline, 16 September to 23 November 2020 and after 2-4 months, 11 January to the 17 January 2021), semistructured telephone interviews. SETTING: A rheumatology service based in a community hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 15 adults with RA. MAIN OUTCOMES: Data were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were identified that related to impact on (1) fear: the dominant emotion, (2) social connections and work practices, (3) physical health, (4) identity and (5) self-management as a coping mechanism. The overriding emotion was one of fear, which remained high throughout both interviews. The negative impact on social well-being increased as the pandemic progressed. Conversely, physical health was not affected at either time point, although participants reported difficulty in interpreting whether physical symptoms were attributable to their RA or COVID-19. Recognition of increased vulnerability led to a reassessment of self-identity; however, respondents reported using previously learnt self-management techniques to cope in the context of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The main impact was on emotional and social well-being. Levels of fear and vulnerability which affected self-identity remained high throughout the pandemic and the impact on social well-being increased over time. Physical health remained largely unaffected. Self-management skills were used to maintain a sense of well-being.

Long-term use of glucocorticoids for polymyalgia rheumatica: follow-up of the PMR Cohort Study.

Objectives: PMR is a common inflammatory condition in older adults, characterized by bilateral hip and shoulder pain and stiffness. Reducing oral glucocorticoids, classically used for ≤2 years, are the mainstay of treatment. This study considers the factors early in the disease course that might be associated with prolonged treatment. Methods: Six hundred and fifty-two people with incident PMR were recruited from English general practices (2012-2014). Participants completed seven questionnaires over 2 years (used to allocate people to pain-stiffness trajectories) and a further long-term follow-up (LTFU) questionnaire a median of 5.16 years after diagnosis. Characteristics of those still taking and having ceased glucocorticoids were described and compared using Kruskal-Wallis and χ2 and Student's 2-sample t-tests as appropriate. Results: Of the 197 people completing the LTFUQ questionnaire, 179 people reported ever having taken glucocorticoids. Of these, 40.1% were still on treatment, with a median (quartile 1, quartile 3) daily dose of 5 (1.5, 9) mg. People still taking glucocorticoids were more likely to be older (72.5 vs 70.2 years, P = 0.035), live alone (31.8 vs 15.0%, P = 0.01) and have self-managed their glucocorticoid dose (39.1 vs 11.0%, P < 0.0001). They were also more likely to belong to a pain-stiffness trajectory class with sustained symptoms. Conclusions: PMR is not always a time-limited condition. Few patient characteristics are associated with prolonged treatment early in the disease course, but those who are older and who have sustained symptoms might be at greater risk. Although accurate prediction is not yet possible, clinicians should monitor people with PMR carefully to manage symptoms and reduce the cumulative glucocorticoid dose.

Gait rehabilitation for foot and ankle impairments in early rheumatoid arthritis: a feasibility study of a new gait rehabilitation programme (GREAT Strides).

BACKGROUND: Foot impairments in early rheumatoid arthritis are common and lead to progressive deterioration of lower limb function. A gait rehabilitation programme underpinned by psychological techniques to improve adherence, may preserve gait and lower limb function. This study evaluated the feasibility of a novel gait rehabilitation intervention (GREAT Strides) and a future trial. METHODS: This was a mixed methods feasibility study with embedded qualitative components. People with early (< 2 years) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and foot pain were eligible. Intervention acceptability was evaluated using a questionnaire. Adherence was evaluated using the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS). Safety was monitored using case report forms. Participants and therapists were interviewed to explore intervention acceptability. Deductive thematic analysis was applied using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. For fidelity, audio recordings of interventions sessions were assessed using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI) scale. Measurement properties of four candidate primary outcomes, rates of recruitment, attrition, and data completeness were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-five participants (68.6% female) with median age (inter-quartile range [IQR]) 60.1 [49.4-68.4] years and disease duration 9.1 [4.0-16.2] months), were recruited and 23 (65.7%) completed 12-week follow-up. Intervention acceptability was excellent; 21/23 were confident that it could help and would recommend it; 22/23 indicated it made sense to them. Adherence was good, with a median [IQR] EARS score of 17/24 [12.5-22.5]. One serious adverse event that was unrelated to the study was reported. Twelve participants' and 9 therapists' interviews confirmed intervention acceptability, identified perceptions of benefit, but also highlighted some barriers to completion. Mean MITI scores for relational (4.38) and technical (4.19) aspects of motivational interviewing demonstrated good fidelity. The Foot Function Index disability subscale performed best in terms of theoretical consistency and was deemed most practical. CONCLUSION: GREAT Strides was viewed as acceptable by patients and therapists, and we observed high intervention fidelity, good patient adherence, and no safety concerns. A future trial to test the additional benefit of GREAT Strides to usual care will benefit from amended eligibility criteria, refinement of the intervention and strategies to ensure higher follow-up rates. The Foot Function Index disability subscale was identified as the primary outcome for the future trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN14277030.

What non-pharmacological treatments do people with polymyalgia rheumatica try: results from the PMR Cohort Study.

Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is common. The mainstay of treatment, glucocorticoids, are associated with significant adverse effects and many patients remain on high doses for a number of years. Little is known about the use of other, non-pharmacological therapies as adjuncts in PMR. The PMR Cohort Study is an inception cohort study of patients diagnosed with PMR in primary care. This analysis presents data on the use and perceived impact of non-pharmacological therapies from a long-term follow-up survey. Non-pharmacological treatments were classified as either diet, exercise, or complementary therapies. Results are presented as adjusted means, medians, and raw counts where appropriate. One hundred and ninety-seven participants completed the long-term follow-up questionnaire, of these 81 (41.1%) reported using non-pharmacological therapy. Fifty-seven people reported using a form of complementary therapy, 35 used exercise and 20 reported changing their diet. No individual non-pharmacological therapy appeared to be associated with long-term outcomes. The use of non-pharmacological therapies is common amongst PMR patients, despite the paucity of evidence supporting their use. This suggests that people perceive a need for treatment options in addition to standard glucocorticoid regimens. Further research is needed to understand patients' aims when seeking additional treatments and to strengthen the evidence base for their use so that patients can be guided towards effective options.

'It's just a great muddle when it comes to food': a qualitative exploration of patient decision-making around diet and gout.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to understand whether, why and how patients choose to modify their diets after developing gout. METHODS: We conducted an inductive thematic secondary analysis of qualitative data from 43 interviews and four focus groups with UK participants with gout (n = 61). RESULTS: Participants commonly initiated dietary changes as part of a self-management strategy for gout. Reasons for making such dietary changes included: desperation; a desire for control; and belief that it would be possible to achieve successful management through diet alone; but not weight loss. Participants who did not make changes or who reverted to previous dietary patterns did so because: they believed urate-lowering therapy was successfully managing their gout; medication allowed normal eating; they did not find 'proof' that diet would be an effective treatment; or the dietary advice they found was unrealistic, unmanageable or irrelevant. Dietary modification was patient led, but patients would have preferred the support of a health-care professional. Beliefs that diet could potentially explain and modify the timing of flares gave patients a sense of control over the condition. However, the belief that gout could be controlled through dietary modification appeared to be a barrier to acceptance of management with urate-lowering therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions about gout and diet play a large role in the way patients make decisions about how to manage gout in their everyday lives. Addressing the reasons why patients explore dietary solutions, promoting the value of urate-lowering therapy and weight loss and drawing on strong evidence to communicate clearly will be crucial in improving long-term clinical management and patient experience.