[Successful switch from originator to biosimilar growth hormone: patients' experiences]. / Succesvolle overgang van biological op biosimilar.

OBJECTIVE: To survey patients' experiences with the switch from an originator biologic to a biosimilar growth hormone. DESIGN: Questionnaire. METHOD: We developed a questionnaire in which patients were asked about their experiences with the switch from an originator biologic to a biosimilar growth hormone. The questionnaire was distributed to all 207 patients who were switched to the biosimilar in the Radboudumc since April 2014. The following topics were covered: (a) difficulties experienced in switching from originator to biosimilar; (b) patient education; (c) effectiveness of the biosimilar product; (d) possible adverse effects experienced; and (e) experience with application of the new injection system for the biosimilar. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 79 patients (38.1%). Seventy-two percent of the patients indicated that before switching they had no concerns about switching. The other patients did have concerns beforehand, which were related to the different injection system (n=13), possible new adverse effects (n=13) and safety of the biosimilar (n=11). Before the switch was made, all patients had been informed in writing and also individually by endocrinologists and specialised nurses; 93% of the patients was satisfied with the counselling provided by Radboudumc. Concerning use of the new injection system, 95% of the patients indicated that they had received individual training and 98% was confident in using it. Patients rated the process of transition to the biosimilar at the Radboudumc an average of 7.8 (range: 1-10). CONCLUSION: Patients were satisfied with the switch to the biosimilar growth hormone and there were few side-effects. Some minor problems were encountered, but these could be solved. Extensive counselling of patients before switching to prescription of biosimilars proved to be worthwhile. The switch has led to a significant reduction in costs.

What do we know about rheumatoid arthritis patients' support needs for self-management? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Self-management support is essential to perform self-management behavior. To provide this support in an effective way, insight in the needs for self-management support is necessary. OBJECTIVE: To give an overview of self-management support needs from the perspective of rheumatoid arthritis patients to help nurses to improve self-management. DESIGN: We conducted a scoping review for the period of January 2002 to May 2013 using the following inclusion criteria: (1) studies on adult patients aged 18 years and older, (2) studies from the perspective of rheumatoid arthritis patients, (3) studies reporting results on support needs, and (4) empirical studies using any design. DATA SOURCES: We searched in PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. REVIEW METHODS: Following the steps of a scoping review, we (1) identified the research question, (2) identified relevant studies, (3) selected studies, (4) charted the data, and (5) collated, summarized, and reported results. We incorporated the optional sixth step of consultation of a multidisciplinary panel of professionals and patients to validate our findings. RESULTS: Seventeen articles were included. Our review shows that rheumatoid arthritis patients have informational, emotional, social and practical support needs. We found an information need for various topics, e.g. exercises and medication. Patients express a need for emotional support in daily life, given through other RA patients, colleagues and supervisors and nurses. For information needs, emotional and social support it is important that it is tailored to the individual needs of the patient. CONCLUSION: The most important support needs for self-management mentioned by rheumatoid arthritis patients are more informational, social and practical support and emotional support. Considering patients' perspective as a starting point for delivering support for self-management can lead to the development of nursing interventions tailored to the needs of rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Effect of Aerobic Exercise Training on Fatigue in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) fatigue is not being well-managed currently, and evidence of effective interventions is limited. Aerobic exercise may provide benefit to treat fatigue in RA. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to analyze the effect of aerobic land-based exercise on fatigue in RA. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and trial registers to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a supervised land-based aerobic exercise program performed with an intensity between 50% and 90% of maximal heart rate, of at least 15 minutes' duration, performed at least 2 times a week, and lasting for a time period of at least 4 consecutive weeks. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. A meta-analysis of fatigue outcomes was performed by calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Five RCTs were included. None of the trials selected patients with RA for having fatigue. Risk of bias was low in 3 RCTs and unclear in 2. Land-based aerobic exercise programs had a positive effect on fatigue in RA compared to no exercise at 12 weeks, SMD -0.31 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.55, -0.06). At 24 weeks, the effect of aerobic land-based exercise was smaller and not statistically significant: SMD -0.15 (95% CI -0.33, 0.02). CONCLUSION: There is evidence with low risk of bias that an aerobic exercise program is effective in reducing fatigue among patients with RA, especially in the short term; however, effects are small. To substantiate the evidence, RCTs should be performed in patients with RA selected for having fatigue.

Severe fatigue in patients with adrenal insufficiency: physical, psychosocial and endocrine determinants.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a frequently experienced complaint in patients with adrenal insufficiency (AI) and may be influenced by cortisol levels. AIM: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of severe fatigue in adrenal insufficiency (AI) patients, to assess which dimensions contribute to fatigue severity and to determine the association between salivary cortisol levels and momentary fatigue. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study in the outpatient department of a university hospital. Included were 27 patients with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), 26 patients with primary AI (PAI), 24 patients with secondary AI (SAI) and 31 patients with adrenal insufficiency after treatment for Cushing's syndrome (Cush-AI). Measurements included computerised questionnaires to determine fatigue severity and physical and psychosocial contributors. Patients took four saliva samples at home, in which cortisol levels were measured. RESULTS: Severe fatigue was experienced by 41 % of the CAH patients, 42 % of the PAI patients, 50 % of the SAI patients and 42 % of the Cush-AI patients. Psychological distress, functional impairment, sleep disturbance, physical activity, concentration problems and social functioning contributed to the subjective experience of fatigue. Salivary cortisol levels were not correlated with momentary fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of AI patients experience severe fatigue. Salivary cortisol level is not a significant predictor for momentary fatigue in AI patients.

Relationship between objectively assessed physical activity and fatigue in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: inverse correlation of activity and fatigue.

OBJECTIVE: Fatigue is generally associated with low physical activity in patients with various chronic medical conditions. However, such an association has not been reported among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objectives of this study were to investigate whether daily activity level is associated with fatigue in patients with RA, and whether pain, disability, coping, and/or cognition are associated with the level of daily activity. METHODS: Patients with RA who visited our outpatient clinic were recruited consecutively. Fatigue severity was measured using the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS20). Physical activity was measured for 14 consecutive days using an ankle-worn actometer. The daily activity level of each patient was calculated, and each patient was classified as having a low or high activity level with respect to the group average. Data were analyzed by linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients were included in the analysis; 25% had a low activity level and 75% had a high activity level. A regression analysis revealed that higher activity levels were associated with reduced fatigue (P = 0.008). The mean ± SD CIS fatigue score was 30.9 ± 12.3 among the patients with a high activity level and 35.7 ± 12.8 among the patients with a low activity level (P = 0.03). Pain, disability, coping, and cognition were not associated significantly with daily activity level. CONCLUSION: Among patients with RA, a higher level of daily physical activity was associated with reduced levels of fatigue. This relationship was not explained by differences in sex, age, disease duration, pain, disability, or other fatigue-related factors.

The effect of anti-TNF-α vs. DMARDs on fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

OBJECTIVES: Fatigue is experienced frequently by patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Fatigue may be caused by high levels of pain and disease activity in RA but can remain present while disease activity is moderate to low. It is not clear whether RA patients receiving anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) treatment reach lower levels of acute fatigue than RA patients receiving disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment. The aim of our study was to analyse whether, in patients with RA, the effect of anti-TNF on fatigue is greater than the effect of DMARD treatment. METHOD: Sixty-seven RA patients receiving anti-TNF treatment and 104 RA patients receiving DMARDs were included. All patients were on stable treatment for at least 6 months prior to baseline measurement. Fatigue was measured monthly over 1 year with the fatigue severity subscale of the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-fatigue). The association between persistent severe fatigue and medication group was analysed using multiple linear regression including confounders. RESULTS: In the anti-TNF group the mean (SD) level of persistent fatigue was significantly higher than in the DMARD group [32.2 (11.4) vs. 28.3 (10.9), p = 0.025] and more patients experienced persistent severe (CIS-fatigue score ≥ 35) fatigue (42% and 27% respectively, p = 0.043). However, when correcting for age, disease activity, haemoglobin, treatment duration, pain, physical disability, and clinical depression, medication type seemed to influence neither the mean level of persistent fatigue (p = 0.251) nor the percentage of patients with persistent severe fatigue (p = 0.745). CONCLUSIONS: When taking into account probable confounders including disease activity, medication type did not influence persistent fatigue in RA patients. It seems that, besides its anti-inflammatory effect, anti-TNF has no complementary effect on persistent fatigue.