Management of Patients with Gout and Kidney Disease: A Review of Available Therapies and Common Missteps.

Gout, a common form of inflammatory arthritis, is characterized by deposition of monosodium urate crystals in articular and periarticular tissues. Repeated flares of gout cause joint damage as well as significant health care utilization and decreased quality of life. Patients with CKD have a higher prevalence of gout. Treating Patients with CKD and gout is challenging because of the lack of quality data to guide management in this specific population. This often leads to suboptimal treatment of patients with gout and impaired renal function because concerns regarding the efficacy and safety of available gout therapies in this population often result in significant interphysician variability in treatment regimens and dosages. Acute gout flares are treated with various agents, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine, glucocorticoids, and-more recently-IL-1 inhibitors. These medications can also be used as prophylaxis if urate-lowering therapy (ULT) is initiated. While these drugs can be used in patients with gout and CKD, there are often factors that complicate treatment, such as the numerous medication interactions involving colchicine and the effect of glucocorticoids on common comorbidities, such as diabetes and hypertension. ULT is recommended to treat recurrent flares, tophaceous deposits, and patients with moderate-to-severe CKD with a serum urate goal of <6 mg/dl recommended to prevent flares. While many misconceptions exist around the risks of using urate-lowering agents in patients with CKD, there is some evidence that these medications can be used safely in Patients with renal impairment. Additional questions exist as to whether gout treatment is indicated for Patients on RRT. Furthermore, there are conflicting data on whether ULT can affect renal function and cardiovascular disease in patients. All of these factors contribute to the unique challenges physicians face when treating patients with gout and CKD.

Health care practitioners' confidence assessing lupus-related rashes in patients of color.

Background: Patients with skin of color (P-SOC) are disproportionately burdened by lupus and often have worse disease outcomes than white patients. This is partly because educational materials underrepresent P-SOC, thereby promoting unconscious bias and clinical deficiencies among practitioners.Purpose: We sought to measure providers' confidence in diagnosing the cutaneous manifestations of lupus (i.e., lupus-related rashes) in P-SOC and to assess which factors influenced their confidence.Research Design: We created and distributed a survey that gathered information about participants' personal characteristics, clinical specialty, training, and current practice as well as measuring their confidence assessing lupus-related rashes in various skin tones.Study Sample: Practitioners from the fields of rheumatology, dermatology, and internal medicine in the greater St. Louis area (Missouri, USA) participated in the survey.Analysis: We compared practitioners' mean confidence levels assessing lupus-related rashes in patients with fair skin and P-SOC with a linear mixed effects model and used univariate and multivariate linear regression models to determine if the aforementioned factors correlated with confidence.Results: Participants' mean confidence in diagnosing lupus-related rashes in P-SOC was significantly lower than assessing such findings in patients with fair skin (p = .009). Several factors correlated with confidence level at a univariate level; however, the multivariate model revealed experience as the only factor significantly associated with confidence (p = .001). Conclusions: Providers report significantly less confidence assessing lupus-related rashes in P-SOC than in patients with fair skin. Our analysis demonstrates that experience positively correlates with confidence and suggests that interventions which enhance practitioners' exposure to and experience with these rashes in P-SOC can improve clinical confidence as well as patient outcomes.