Implementation of recommendations in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: considerations for development and uptake.

A clinical guideline is a document with the aim of guiding decisions based on evidence regarding diagnosis, management and treatment in specific areas of healthcare. Specific to rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), adherence to clinical guidelines recommendations impacts the outcomes of people with these diseases. However, currently, the implementation of recommendations is less than optimal in rheumatology.The WHO has described the implementation of evidence-based recommendations as one of the greatest challenges facing the global health community and has identified the importance of scaling up these recommendations. But closing the evidence-to-practice gap is often complex, time-consuming and difficult. In this context, the implementation science offers a framework to overcome this scenario.This article describes the principles of implementation science to facilitate and optimise the implementation of clinical recommendations in RMDs. Embedding implementation science methods and techniques into recommendation development and daily practice can help maximise the likelihood that implementation is successful in improving the quality of healthcare and healthcare services.

Assessing acceptability and identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation of the EULAR recommendations for patient education in inflammatory arthritis: a mixed-methods study with rheumatology professionals in 23 European and Asian countries.

OBJECTIVES: To disseminate and assess the level of acceptability and applicability of the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) recommendations for patient education among professionals in rheumatology across Europe and three Asian countries and identify potential barriers and facilitators to their application. METHODS: A parallel convergent mixed-methods design with an inductive approach was used. A web-based survey, available in 20 different languages, was distributed to health professionals by non-probability sampling. The level of agreement and applicability of each recommendation was assessed by (0-10) rating scales. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were assessed using free-text responses. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data by content analysis and presented in 16 categories supported by quotes. RESULTS: A total of 1159 completed the survey; 852 (73.5%) were women. Most of the professionals were nurses (n=487), rheumatologists (n=320), physiotherapists (n=158). For all recommendations, the level of agreement was high but applicability was lower. The four most common barriers to application were lack of time, lack of training in how to provide patient education, not having enough staff to perform this task and lack of evaluation tools. The most common facilitators were tailoring patient education to individual patients, using group education, linking patient education with diagnosis and treatment and inviting patients to provide feedback on patient education delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This project has disseminated the EULAR recommendations for patient education to health professionals across 23 countries. Potential barriers to their application were identified and some are amenable to change, namely training patient education providers and developing evaluation tools.

Disseminating and assessing implementation of the EULAR recommendations for patient education in inflammatory arthritis: a mixed-methods study with patients' perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To explore patients' agreement and reasons for agreement or disagreement with the EULAR recommendations for patient education (PE) for people with inflammatory arthritis (IA). METHODS: This mixed-method survey collected data using snowball sampling. The survey had been translated into 20 languages by local healthcare professionals, researchers and patient research partners. It explored the degree to which patients with IA agreed with each recommendation for PE (0=do not agree at all and 10=agree completely) and their rationale for their agreement level in free text questions. Descriptive statistics summarised participants' demographics and agreement levels. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyse the free text data. Sixteen subcategories were developed, describing the reasons for agreement or disagreement with the recommendations, which constituted the categories. RESULTS: The sample comprised 2779 participants (79% female), with a mean (SD) age 55.1 (13.1) years and disease duration 17.1 (13.3) years. Participants strongly agreed with most recommendations (median 10 (IQR: 9-10) for most recommendations). Reasons for agreement with the recommendations included the benefit of using PE to facilitate collaborative care and shared decision making, the value of flexible and tailored PE, and the value of gaining support from other patients. Reasons for disagreement included lack of resources for PE, not wanting information to be tailored by healthcare professionals and a reluctance to use telephone-based PE. CONCLUSION: The EULAR recommendations for PE have been disseminated among patients with IA. Overall, agreement levels were very high, suggesting that they reflect patients' preferences for engaging in collaborative clinical care and using PE to facilitate and supplement their own understanding of IA. Reasons for not completely agreeing with the recommendations can inform implementation strategies and education of healthcare professionals.

The perception of stakeholders on the applicability of nurse-led clinics in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: RA should be treated to target in a process of shared decision-making with patients. Person-centred care is essential to meeting specific patient needs. Nurse-led clinics, where a nurse is responsible for care, have demonstrated added value in some countries but are still not implemented widely. This study aimed to explore stakeholders' perceptions of advantages, disadvantages and conditions for the implementation of nurse-led clinics for RA in Belgium. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional qualitative study consisting of five semi-structured focus group interviews. Rheumatology nurses, patients with RA and rheumatologists were interviewed as stakeholders. The analysis was carried out by three researchers according to the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL), formulating a conceptual framework of overarching themes and deconstructing this into perceived advantages, disadvantages and conditions. RESULTS: Two focus groups with nurses (total n = 16), two with patients (n = 17) and one with rheumatologists (n = 9) were conducted. The interview synthesis resulted in five overarching themes across stakeholders: efficiency of care, disease management, legal and organizational requirements, the conventional role of the nurse and the extended role of the nurse. All stakeholders perceived additional education for nurses as essential, but rheumatologists debated nurses' abilities to lead a rheumatology clinic. Furthermore, patients preferred care protocols to guide nurses, and care providers approached this reluctantly. Generally, patients with a well-controlled disease were perceived as the ideal candidates for nurse-led care. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led clinics could provide many benefits but require additional nurse education and a legal and organizational framework before being implemented widely and successfully.

'More than just chitchat': a qualitative study concerning the need and potential format of a peer mentor programme for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients recently diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have specific educational and supportive needs. These could partly be addressed with mentoring by other patients living with RA. This qualitative study explores stakeholder perceptions towards peer mentoring in early RA care. METHODS: Two focus groups with patients with early RA (n=10), one with patient organisation representatives (n=5), one with rheumatologists (n=8) and one with rheumatology nurses (n=5) were held. Two patient research partners supported analysis and interpretation. RESULTS: Four overarching themes were found: added value, experience with peer mentoring, concerns and need in daily care. Patients and patient organisation representatives confirmed the potential of peer mentoring especially regarding sensitive topics not easily discussed with professionals. Patients felt it could provide additional understanding and recognition. Nurses and rheumatologists were less convinced of the added value of peer mentoring because patients never mentioned it and they were concerned about the loss of control over correct information provision. The need for peer mentoring was perceived as person and disease phase-dependent and should therefore be optional, rather than a care standard. The requirements for a peer mentorship programme remained challenging to define for stakeholders. However, all expressed the need for supervision by healthcare professionals and that peer mentors should be carefully selected, educated and matched to newly diagnosed patients. CONCLUSION: Peer mentoring and its implementation remain vague concepts, especially for healthcare providers. However, patients are interested in mentoring by peers, and the current results may support in effectively implementing such programmes early in the disease.

Comorbidity burden in the first three years after diagnosis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis or spondyloarthritis: a general practice registry-based study.

OBJECTIVES: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) are chronic inflammatory rheumatic conditions with high levels of comorbidity requiring additional therapeutic attention. We aimed to compare the 3-year comorbidity incidence and pain medication prescription in patients diagnosed with RA, PsA or SpA versus controls. METHODS: Data between 1999 and 2012 were obtained from Intego, a general practitioner (GP) morbidity registry in Flanders, Belgium. Cases were identified by International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-2) codes representing 'rheumatoid/seropositive arthritis (L88)' or 'musculoskeletal disease other (L99)'. The registered keywords mapped to these ICPC-2 codes were further verified and mapped to a RA/SpA/PsA diagnosis. Controls were matched on age, gender, GP practice and diagnosis date. We analysed the 3-year comorbidity burden in cases and controls, measured by the Rheumatic Diseases Comorbidity Index (RDCI). All electronically GP-prescribed drugs were registered. RESULTS: In total, 738, 229 and 167 patients were included with a diagnosis of RA, SpA or PsA, respectively. Patients with RA or PsA had comparable median RDCI scores at baseline, but higher scores at year 3 compared with controls (RA: p=0.010; PsA: p=0.008). At baseline, depression was more prevalent in PsA patients vs controls (p<0.003). RA patients had a higher 3-year incidence of cardiovascular disease including myocardial infarction than controls (p<0.035). All disease population were given more prescriptions than controls for any pain medication type, even opioids excluding tramadol. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the increasing comorbidity burden of patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic conditions, especially for individuals with RA or PsA. The high opioid use in all populations was remarkable.

A mixed method study exploring patient satisfaction and feasibility of two exercise programmes in systemic sclerosis-associated microstomia.

OBJECTIVE: SSc often leads to fibrotic cutaneous involvement of the face and reduced oral aperture, with impaired food intake and oral hygiene. Oral exercises can increase oral aperture but are often hampered by low adherence rates. The aim of this mixed method study was to explore the feasibility, patient satisfaction and effectiveness of two exercise programmes in SSc-associated microstomia. METHODS: Adult patients suffering from SSc and microstomia (maximal oral aperture <40 mm) were randomized to two groups. Group A exercised with a jaw motion device (Therabite), whereas group B performed mouth-stretching exercises. Patients were expected to exercise for 10 min, three times per day for 3 months. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 3 months (period without intervention), 6 months (after 3 months of intervention) and 9 months (post-intervention). At month 6, semi-structured one-to-one interviews were conducted. RESULTS: We included six women and three men, median age 60 years and median disease duration 8 years. At 6 months, all patients in group A (n = 4) and four in group B (n = 5) improved, with a median of 9 and 7 mm, respectively. The adherence ranged between 63.7 and 98.9% in group A and between 48.5 and 97.4% in group B. The interview revealed three themes: drivers, challenges and perceived improvement. CONCLUSION: Both interventions improved maximal oral aperture. The adherence to therapy was high, but none of the patients considered it feasible to continue practising three times per day. Future studies are needed in order to define feasible long-term exercise programmes.

Five-year treat-to-target outcomes after methotrexate induction therapy with or without other csDMARDs and temporary glucocorticoids for rheumatoid arthritis in the CareRA trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of different treatment schedules from the care in early rheumatoid arthritis (CareRA) trial over 5 years. METHODS: Patients with RA completing the 2-year CareRA randomised controlled trial were eligible for the 3-year observational CareRA-plus study. 5-year outcomes after randomisation to initial methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy with glucocorticoid bridging (COBRA-Slim) were compared with MTX step-up without glucocorticoids or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) combinations with glucocorticoid bridging, per prognostic patient group. Disease activity (Disease Activity Score based on 28 joints calculated with C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP)) and functionality (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)) were compared between treatment arms using longitudinal models; safety and drug use were detailed. RESULTS: Of 322 eligible patients, 252 (78%) entered CareRA-plus, of which 203 (81%) completed the study. Treatments for high-risk patients resulted in comparable DAS28-CRP (p=0.539) and HAQ scores over 5 years (p=0.374). Low-risk patients starting COBRA-Slim had lower DAS28-CRP (p<0.001) and HAQ scores (p=0.041) than those starting only on MTX. At study completion, 114/203 (56%) patients never had their original DMARD therapy intensified, with comparable rates between all treatments. Safety was comparable between treatments in high-risk patients. In low-risk patients, there were 18 adverse events in 10 COBRA-Slim and 36 in 17 patients treated with initial MTX monotherapy (p=0.048). Over 5 years, 22% of patients initiated biologics, 25% took glucocorticoids for >3 months and 17% for >6 months outside the bridging period. CONCLUSIONS: All intensive treatments with glucocorticoids bridging demonstrated excellent 5 year outcomes. Initiating COBRA-Slim was comparably effective as more complex treatments for high-risk patients with early RA and more effective than initial MTX monotherapy for low-risk patients with limited need for biologics and chronic glucocorticoid use.

Having a co-morbidity predicts worse outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis despite intensive treatment: a post hoc evaluation of the pragmatic randomized controlled CareRA trial.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the prevalence of co-morbidities in patients with early RA and determine their prognostic value for effectiveness outcomes in a randomized trial. METHODS: We included patients from the 2-year pragmatic randomized CareRA trial, who had early RA (diagnosis < 1 year), were DMARD naïve and then treated-to-target with different remission induction schemes. Prevalence of co-morbidities was registered at baseline and the Rheumatic Diseases Comorbidity Index (RDCI; range 0-9) was calculated. We tested the relation between baseline RDCI and outcomes including disease activity (DAS28-CRP), physical function (HAQ index), quality of life (SF-36 domains) and hospitalizations over 2 years, using linear mixed models or generalized estimating equations models. RESULTS: Of 379 included patients, 167 (44%) had a RDCI of minimum 1. RDCI scores of 1, 2 or ≥3 were obtained in 65 (17%), 70 (19%), and 32 (8%) participants, respectively. The most frequent co-morbidity was hypertension (22%). Patients with co-morbidities had significantly higher HAQ (ß = 0.215; 95% CI: 0.071, 0.358), DAS28-CRP (ß = 0.225; 95% CI: 0.132, 0.319) and lower SF-36 physical component summary scores (ß =-3.195; 95% CI: -4.844, -1.546) over 2 years than patients without co-morbidities, after adjusting for possible confounders including disease activity and randomized treatment. Patients with co-morbidities had over time lower chances of achieving remission (OR = 0.724; 95% CI: 0.604, 0.867) and a higher risk of hospitalization (OR = 3.725; 95% CI: 2.136, 6.494). CONCLUSION: At disease onset, almost half of RA patients had at least one clinically important co-morbidity. Having co-morbidities was associated with worse functionality and disease activity outcomes over 2 years, despite intensive remission induction treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials NCT01172639.

Does Including Pain, Fatigue, and Physical Function When Assessing Patients with Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Provide a Comprehensive Picture of Disease Burden?

OBJECTIVE: To explore the possibility of integrating patient-important outcomes like pain, fatigue, and physical function into the evaluation of disease status in early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA) without compromising correct disease activity measurement. METHODS: Patients from the 2-year Care in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (CareRA) trial were included. Pain and fatigue (visual analog scales), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), standard components of disease activity [swollen/tender joint counts (SJC/TJC), C-reactive protein (CRP) or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), physician (PhGH) and patient (PaGH) global health] were recorded at every visit (n = 10). Pearson correlation and exploratory factor analyses (EFA), using multiple imputation (15×) and outputation (1000×), were performed per timepoint and overall, on standard components of disease activity scores with and without pain, fatigue, and HAQ. Each of the 15,000 datasets was analyzed using EFA with principal component extraction and oblimin rotation to determine which variables belong together. RESULTS: We included 379 patients. EFA on standard composite score components extracted 2 factors with no substantial cross-loadings. Still, pain (0.83), fatigue (0.65), and HAQ (0.59) were strongly correlated with PaGH. When rerunning the EFA with the inclusion of pain, fatigue, and HAQ, the 2-factor model had substantial cross-loadings between factors. However, a 3-factor model was optimal, with Factor 1: patient assessment, Factor 2: clinical assessment (PhGH, SJC, and TJC), and Factor 3: laboratory assessment (ESR/CRP). CONCLUSION: PaGH, pain, fatigue, and physical function represent a separate aspect of the disease burden of patients with ERA, which could be further explored as a target for care apart from disease activity. [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01172639].

What do patients prefer? A multinational, longitudinal, qualitative study on patient-preferred treatment outcomes in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To explore treatment outcomes preferred by patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and how these change throughout the early disease stage across three European countries. METHODS: A longitudinal, qualitative, multicentre study was conducted in Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden. 80 patients with early RA were individually interviewed 3-9 months after treatment initiation and 51 of them participated again in either a focus group or an individual interview 12-21 months after treatment initiation. Data were first analysed by country, following the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven (QUAGOL). Thereafter, a meta-synthesis, inspired by the principles of meta-ethnography and the QUAGOL, was performed, involving the local research teams. RESULTS: The meta-synthesis revealed 11 subthemes from which four main themes were identified: disease control, physical performance, self-accomplishment and well-being. 'A normal life despite RA' was an overarching patient-preferred outcome across countries. Belgian, Dutch and Swedish patients showed many similarities in terms of which outcomes they preferred throughout the early stage of RA. Some outcome preferences (eg, relief of fatigue and no side effects) developed differently over time across countries. CONCLUSIONS: This study on patient-preferred outcomes in early RA revealed that patients essentially want to live a normal life despite RA. Our findings help to understand what really matters to patients and provide specific insights into the early stage of RA, which should be addressed by clinicians of different disciplines from the start of treatment onwards.

"Mastering a New Life Situation" - Patients' Preferences of Treatment Outcomes in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis - A Longitudinal Qualitative Study.

PURPOSE: To explore patients' preferred treatment outcomes during their first two years with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A qualitative, longitudinal, multicenter study with interviews at two time points was performed in Sweden. Individual interviews were conducted at time point 1 with 31 patients with RA, defined as disease duration of ≤1 year and treatment for 3-7 months. Seven focus group interviews and five individual interviews were conducted at time point 2 with 22 patients 12-20 months after treatment initiation. The interviews were analyzed using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven. A core category with four related concepts emerged. RESULTS: The core finding of patient-preferred treatment outcomes was "mastering a new life situation". Patients preferred to experience control of the disease by controlling the symptoms and by experiencing absence of disease. To experience autonomy by regaining former activity level, experiencing independence, and being empowered was another preferred outcome. Patients preferred to regain identity through being able to participate, experience well-being, and regain former self-image. To experience joy in everyday life through vitality and believing in the future was another preferred outcome. Patients' preferences developed over time from the acute phase of controlling the symptoms and wanting to return to the life they lived prior to diagnosis, to a more preventive way of self-management and empowerment to master the new life situation. CONCLUSION: The patients' preferred treatment outcomes during the first two years with RA were to master their new life situation and changed from a preference to return to a life lived prior disease onset, to a preference of living with quality of life, despite RA. This study increases the understanding of patients' preferred treatment outcomes in the early disease course and can be a foundation for tailoring interventions to be more person-centered and to improve long-term treatment outcomes.

One in five patients with rapidly and persistently controlled early rheumatoid arthritis report poor well-being after 1 year of treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and characterise a subgroup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) reporting not feeling well 1 year after treatment initiation despite achieving optimal disease control according to current treatment standards. METHODS: This observational study included participants of the Care in early RA trial with a rapid and sustained response (DAS28CRP<2.6) from week 16 until year 1 after starting the first RA treatment. Feeling well was assessed at year 1, using five patient-reported outcomes (PROs): pain, fatigue, physical functioning, RA-related quality of life and sleep quality. K-means clustering assigned patients to a cluster based on these PROs. Cohen's d effect size estimated cluster differences at treatment initiation and week 16, for the five clustering PROs, coping behaviour, illness perceptions and social support. RESULTS: Analyses revealed three clusters. Of 140 patients, 77.9% were assigned to the 'concordant to disease activity' cluster, 9.3% to the 'dominant fatigue' cluster and 12.9% to the 'dominant pain and fatigue' cluster. Large differences in pain and fatigue reporting were found at week 16 when comparing the 'concordant' with the 'dominant pain and fatigue' or the 'dominant fatigue' cluster. Small differences in reporting were found for the other PROs. Illness perceptions and coping style also differed in the 'concordant' cluster. CONCLUSIONS: Although most patients reported PRO scores in concordance with their well-controlled disease activity, one in five persistent treatment responders reported not feeling well at year 1. These patients reported higher pain and fatigue, and different illness perceptions and coping strategies early in the disease course.

Two-year cost-effectiveness of different COBRA-like intensive remission induction schemes in early rheumatoid arthritis: a piggyback study on the pragmatic randomised controlled CareRA trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treat-to-target strategies among recently diagnosed patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using methotrexate (MTX) and a step-down glucocorticoid (GC) scheme (COBRA Slim) compared with (1) this combination with either sulphasalazine (COBRA Classic) or leflunomide (COBRA Avant-Garde) in high-risk patients and (2) MTX without GCs (Tight-Step-Up, TSU) in low-risk patients. METHODS: The incremental cost-utility was calculated from a healthcare perspective in the intention-to-treat population (n=379) of the 2-year open-label pragmatic randomised controlled Care in early RA trial. Healthcare costs were collected prospectively through electronic trial records. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using mapping algorithms for EuroQoL-5 Dimension. Multiple imputation was used to handle missing data and bootstrapping to calculate CIs. Robustness was tested with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs at biosimilar prices. RESULTS: In the high-risk group, Classic (∆k€1.464, 95% CI -0.198 to 3.127) and Avant-Garde (∆k€0.636, 95% CI -0.987 to 2.258) were more expensive compared with Slim and QALYs were slightly worse for Classic (∆-0.002, 95% CI -0.086 to 0.082) and Avant-Garde (∆-0.009, 95% CI -0.102 to 0.084). This resulted in the domination of Classic and Avant-Garde by Slim. In the low-risk group, Slim was cheaper (∆k€-0.617, 95% CI -2.799 to 1.566) and QALYs were higher (∆0.141, 95% CI 0.008 to 0.274) compared with TSU, indicating Slim dominated. Results were robust against the price of biosimilars. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of MTX with a GC bridging scheme is less expensive with comparable health utility than more intensive step-down combination strategies or a conventional step-up approach 2 years after initial treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01172639.

Effectiveness of maintenance therapy with methotrexate compared with leflunomide for patients with RA having achieved disease control with both these drugs: results of a predefined sub-analysis of CareRA, a pragmatic RCT.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: Evidence regarding the effectiveness of step-down strategies for patients with well-controlled early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on a combination of methotrexate (MTX) and leflunomide (LEF) is currently lacking. METHOD: The Care in early RA (CareRA) trial is a 2-year randomized pragmatic trial comparing different remission induction strategies in treatment-naïve patients with early RA. For this study, we included participants who achieved low disease activity (LDA) (DAS28-CRP ≤ 3.2) between 40 to 52 weeks after starting a combination of MTX, LEF, and a prednisone bridging scheme followed by a treat-to-target approach. Patients were re-randomized to a maintenance monotherapy of either MTX 15 mg weekly or LEF 20 mg daily. Remission rates (DAS28-CRP < 2.6) at week 65 counted from re-randomization, as well as drug retention rates and safety during the 65 weeks of follow-up, were compared. RESULTS: Remission rates at week 65 after re-randomization were numerically higher in patients assigned to MTX (29/32; 90.6%) compared with patients on LEF (20/27; 74.1%) (p = 0.091). Of patients assigned to MTX, 60% (19/32) maintained LDA while continuing their assigned monotherapy until week 65 after re-randomization versus 44% (12/27) in the LEF group (p = 0.25). Patients re-randomized to MTX were more frequently in LDA measured by Clinical Disease Activity Index (32/32; 100%) compared with patients on LEF (23/27; 85.2%) (p = 0.024) 65 weeks after re-randomization. According to survival analyses, the probability of maintaining MTX monotherapy was higher (81%) than maintaining LEF monotherapy (55%) for 65 weeks (p = 0.025) after re-randomization. Safety analysis after re-randomization showed a good safety profile in both groups. CONCLUSION: MTX monotherapy seems not significantly more efficacious as maintenance treatment compared with LEF monotherapy but has a better retention rate and is well tolerated in early RA patients in LDA after combination therapy with both. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials NCT01172639 Key points • Methotrexate should be preferred over leflunomide as maintenance therapy after an initial intensive combination of these two drugs. • Methotrexate shows a better retention rate to leflunomide as maintenance therapy in this context.

First Validation of the Full PROMIS Pain Interference and Pain Behavior Item Banks in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Pain interference and pain behavior are highly relevant outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a universally applicable set of item banks measuring patient-reported health, and if applied as computerized adaptive tests (CATs), more efficiently and precisely than current instruments. The objective was to study the psychometric properties of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS pain interference (PROMIS-PI) and the PROMIS pain behavior (PROMIS-PB) item banks in patients with RA. METHODS: A total of 2,029 patients with RA completed the full PROMIS-PI (version 1.1, 40 items), and 1,554 patients completed the full PROMIS-PB (version 1.1, 39 items). The following psychometric properties were studied: unidimensionality, local dependence, monotonicity and graded response model (GRM) fit, cross-cultural validity (differential item functioning [DIF] for language [Dutch versus Flemish]), other forms of measurement invariance, construct validity, reliability, and floor and ceiling effects. RESULTS: The PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PB banks were sufficiently unidimensional (Omega-hierarchical [Omega-H] 0.99, 0.95, and explained common variance 0.95, 0.78, respectively), had negligible local dependence (0.3-1.4% of item pairs), good monotonicity (H 0.75, 0.46), and a good GRM model fit (no misfitting items). Furthermore, both item banks showed good cross-cultural validity (no DIF for language), measurement invariance (no DIF for age, sex, administration mode, and disease activity), good construct validity (all hypotheses met), high reliability (>0.90 in the range of patients with RA), and an absence of floor and ceiling effects (0% minimum or maximum score, respectively). CONCLUSION: Both PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PB banks showed good psychometric properties in patients with RA and can be used as CATs in research and clinical practice.

Effectiveness of different combinations of DMARDs and glucocorticoid bridging in early rheumatoid arthritis: two-year results of CareRA.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether MTX should be combined with an additional DMARD and bridging glucocorticoids as initial treatment for patients with early RA to induce an effective long-term response. METHODS: The Care in early RA study is a two-year investigator-initiated pragmatic multicentre randomized trial. Early RA patients, naïve to DMARDs and glucocorticoids, were stratified based on prognostic factors. High-risk patients were randomized to COBRA-Classic (n = 98): MTX, sulfasalazine, prednisone step-down from 60 mg; COBRA-Slim (n = 98): MTX, prednisone step-down from 30 mg; or COBRA-Avant-Garde (n = 93): MTX, leflunomide, prednisone step-down from 30 mg. Low-risk patients were randomized to COBRA-Slim (n = 43); or Tight Step Up (TSU) (n = 47): MTX without prednisone. Clinical/radiological outcomes at year 2, sustainability of response, safety and treatment adaptations were assessed. RESULTS: In the high-risk group 71/98 (72%) patients achieved a DAS28-CRP < 2.6 with COBRA-Slim compared with 64/98 (65%) with COBRA-Classic and 69/93 (74%) with COBRA-Avant-Garde (P = 1.00). Other clinical/radiological outcomes and sustainability of response were similar. COBRA-Slim treatment resulted in less therapy-related adverse events compared with COBRA-Classic (P = 0.02) or COBRA-Avant-Garde (P = 0.005). In the low-risk group, 29/43 (67%) patients on COBRA-Slim and 34/47 (72%) on TSU achieved a DAS28-CRP < 2.6 (P = 1.00). On COBRA-Slim, low-risk patients had lower longitudinal DAS28-CRP scores over 2 years, a lower need for glucocorticoid injections and a comparable safety profile compared with TSU. CONCLUSION: All regimens combining DMARDs with glucocorticoids were effective for patients with early RA up to 2 years. The COBRA-Slim regimen, MTX monotherapy with glucocorticoid bridging, provided the best balance between efficacy and safety, irrespective of patients' prognosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01172639.

Patient-Reported Outcome Data From an Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial: Opportunities for Broadening the Scope of Treating to Target.

OBJECTIVE: Treating early, intensively, and to target leads to rapid disease control, preventing joint damage and loss of function in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We report the effect of such an approach on patient-reported outcomes and explore the contribution of rapid and persistent disease control to well-being after 1 year of treatment. METHODS: This study is part of the Care in Early RA trial, a prospective, 2-year, investigator-initiated, randomized controlled trial rooted in daily practice and implementing the treat-to-target principle. Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey and Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) data were collected prospectively. We defined 4 clinical response profiles based on speed and consistency of the treatment response within the first year, defined as the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level <2.6. Linear regression analyses including these response profiles and treatment type were constructed to predict the SF-36 dimensions of vitality, social functioning, role emotional, and mental health, and the IPQ-R illness perception subscales of consequences, treatment control, and illness coherence at year 1. RESULTS: A total of 333 patients were available for the main analyses, including 140 early persistent responders. Variation in each of the psychosocial outcomes at year 1 was explained mostly by baseline values, followed by the clinical response profiles. Patients with an early persistent response reported significantly higher vitality, more positive beliefs about disease consequences and treatment effect. Treatment type did not matter. CONCLUSION: Rapid and persistent disease control and not treatment type were associated with favorable patient-reported health and illness perceptions at year 1, but baseline psychosocial variables mattered most. Our data indicate opportunities to broaden the scope of the treat-to-target principle in early RA.

European Qualitative research project on Patient-preferred outcomes in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (EQPERA): rationale, design and methods of a multinational, multicentre, multilingual, longitudinal qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Including the patient perspective is important to achieve optimal outcomes in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Ample qualitative studies exist on patient outcomes in RA. A Belgian study recently unravelled what matters most to patients throughout the overwhelming and rapidly evolving early stage of RA. The present study, European Qualitative research project on Patient-preferred outcomes in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (EQPERA) was created to contribute to a more universal understanding of patient-preferred health and treatment outcomes by integrating the perspectives of patients with early RA from three European countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In EQPERA, a qualitative, explorative, longitudinal study will be implemented in The Netherlands and Sweden, parallel to the methods applied in the previously conducted Belgian study. In each country, a purposive sample of patients with early RA will be individually interviewed 3-6 months after start of the initial RA treatment and subsequently, the same participants will be invited to take part in a focus group 12-18 months after RA treatment initiation. Data collection and analysis will be independently conducted by the local research teams in their native language. A meta-analysis of the local findings will be performed to explore and describe similarities, differences and patterns across countries. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was granted by the responsible local ethics committees. EQPERA follows the recommendations of the Declaration of Helsinki. Two main papers are foreseen (apart from the data reporting on the local findings) for peer-reviewed publication.