Recomendaciones de expertos para el uso de apremilast en artritis psoriásica / Expert recommendations for the use of apremilast in psoriatic arthritis

Introducción y objetivos: A pesar de la evidencia, existen dudas sobre el posicionamiento de apremilast en el algoritmo de tratamiento de la artritis psoriásica (APs). El objetivo del presente proyecto fue recoger la evidencia científica y la experiencia de un grupo de reumatólogos expertos en el manejo de la APs sobre el uso de apremilast en la práctica clínica en España. Material y métodos: Un comité científico formado por 6 expertos propuso 5 escenarios clínicos donde la evidencia sobre el uso de apremilast en APs era controvertida: 1) eficacia en APs periférica; 2) eficacia en entesitis y dactilitis; 3) eficacia en APs con afectación cutánea; 4) comorbilidades, y 5) seguridad de apremilast. Tras esto, un panel de 17 reumatólogos expertos en el tratamiento de la APs discutió estos escenarios y generó un cuestionario con 50 preguntas y 156 ítems según metodología Delphi, el cual fue respondido de forma anónima por los panelistas. Resultados: Tras 2 rondas de votación, el panel de expertos alcanzó el consenso en 93 de los 156 ítems planteados (59,6%) (67 apropiados y 26 inapropiados). El grado de consenso fue del 53,3% en el área de «Eficacia en APs periférica»; del 60,0% en «Eficacia en entesitis y dactilitis»; del 50,0% en «Eficacia en APs con afectación cutánea»; del 57,1% en «Manejo de las comorbilidades en pacientes con APs», y del 67,3% en «Implicaciones de la seguridad en el uso de apremilast». Conclusiones: La opinión estructurada de los expertos complementa la evidencia disponible y contribuye al establecimiento de pautas consensuadas para el uso de apremilast en APs.(AU)

Introduction and objectives: Despite the evidence, there are doubts about the positioning of apremilast in the psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment algorithm. The objective of this project was to collect the scientific evidence and the experience of a group of rheumatologists who are experts in the management of PsA with apremilast in clinical practice in Spain. Material and methods: A scientific committee made up of 6 experts proposed 5 clinical scenarios where the evidence on the use of apremilast in PsA was controversial: 1) efficacy in peripheral PsA; 2) efficacy in enthesitis and dactylitis; 3) efficacy in PsA with skin involvement; 4) comorbidities, and 5) apremilast safety. After this, a panel of 17 rheumatologists with expertise in PsA management discussed these scenarios and generated a questionnaire with 50 questions and 156 items following the Delphi methodology. This questionnaire was anonymously answered by the panel. Results: After 2 voting rounds, the panel of experts reached consensus in 93 of the 156 items raised (59.6%) (67 appropiate and 26 inappropiate). The degree of consensus was 53.3% in the area of “Efficacy in peripheral PsA”; 60.0% in “Efficacy in enthesitis and dactylitis”; 50.0% in “Efficacy in PsA with skin involvement”; 57.1% in “Management of comorbidities in patients with PsA”, and 67.3% in “Implications of safety in the use of apremilast”. Conclusions: The structured opinion of the experts complements the available evidence and contributes to the establishment of consensual guidelines for the use of apremilast in PsA.(AU)

Expert recommendations for the use of apremilast in psoriatic arthritis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the evidence, there are doubts about the positioning of apremilast in the psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment algorithm. The objective of this project was to collect the scientific evidence and the experience of a group of rheumatologists who are experts in the management of PsA with apremilast in clinical practice in Spain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A scientific committee made up of 6 experts proposed 5 clinical scenarios where the evidence on the use of apremilast in PsA was controversial: (i) Efficacy in peripheral PsA; (ii) Efficacy in enthesitis and dactylitis; (iii) Efficacy in PsA with skin involvement; (iv) Comorbidities; and (v) Apremilast safety. After this, a panel of 17 rheumatologists with expertise in PsA management discussed these scenarios and generated a questionnaire with 50 questions and 156 items following the Delphi methodology. This questionnaire was anonymously answered by the panel. RESULTS: After 2 voting rounds, the panel of experts reached consensus in 93 of the 156 items raised (59.6%) (67 in agreement and 26 in disagreement). The degree of consensus was 53.3% in the area of "Efficacy in peripheral PsA"; 60.0% in "Efficacy in enthesitis and dactylitis"; 50.0% in "Efficacy in PsA with skin involvement"; 57.1% in "Management of comorbidities in patients with PsA"; and 67.3% in "Implications of safety in the use of apremilast". CONCLUSIONS: The structured opinion of the experts complements the available evidence and contributes to the establishment of consensual guidelines for the use of apremilast in PsA.

Anti-TNF vs tocilizumab in refractory uveitic cystoid macular edema due to Behcet's disease. Multicenter study of 49 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of TNF inhibitors (adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX)) vs tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with refractory cystoid macular edema (CME) due to Behçet's disease (BD). METHODS: Multicenter study of patients with BD-associated CME refractory to conventional and/or biological immunosuppressive drugs. From a cohort of 177 patients treated with anti-TNF and 14 patients treated with TCZ, we selected those with CME at baseline. We analyzed the evolution of macular thickness (main outcome), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and intraocular inflammation (Tyndall and vitritis) from baseline up to 4 years in the 3 groups mentioned. RESULTS: 49 patients and 72 eyes with CME were included. ADA was used in 25 patients (40 eyes), IFX in 15 (21 eyes) and TCZ in 9 (11 eyes). No statistically significant baseline differences were observed between the 3 groups except for a lower basal BCVA in TCZ group and a higher basal degree of intraocular inflammation in ADA group. Most patients from all groups had received several conventional immunosuppressive drugs. In addition, most patients in the group of TCZ had also received anti-TNF agents. Biological therapy was used in monotherapy (n=8) or combined with conventional immunosuppressive drugs (n=41). Macular thickness progressively decreased in the 3 groups, with no signs of CME after 1 year of treatment. Similarly, BCVA improvement and inflammatory intraocular remission was achieved in all groups. CONCLUSION: Refractory CME associated with BD uveitis can be effectively treated either with ADA, IFX or TCZ. Furthermore, TCZ is effective in patients resistant to anti-TNF therapy.

Trends in amyloidosis in spondyloarthritis: results from the Spanish National Inpatient Registry over a 17-year period (1999-2015)-TREND-EspA study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of amyloidosis and trends therein in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) over a long period (17 years). METHODS: An observational retrospective population-based matched cohort study was conducted. All the admissions of patients with SpA, including ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), arthritis associated with inflammatory bowel disease (SpA-IBD) and reactive arthritis (ReA), reported between 1999 and 2015, were analysed and a control group matched by age, sex and year of admission was selected. Incidence rates for amyloidosis were calculated. Generalised linear models were used for trend analysis and unconditional logistic regression for calculating crude and adjusted ORs (AOR) to assess the association between amyloidosis and SpA. RESULTS: The study database contained data on 107 140 admissions in each group. Between 1999 and 2015, 792 patients in the SpA cohort (0.7% of all admissions) had a diagnosis of amyloidosis versus 68 in the non-SpA cohort (0.1%) (p<0.001). From 1999 to 2015, incidence rates of amyloidosis tended to decrease in the SpA cohort (-4.63%/year overall), while they increased in the Non-SpA cohort (+10.25%/year overall). We found strong associations of amyloidosis with all SpAs (AOR 10.4; 95% CI 8.2 to 13.3) and with each type studied (AORs 10.05 (7.84 to 12. 88) for AS, 9.5 (7.3 to 12.4) for PsA, 22.9 (16.6 to 31.7) for SpA-IBD and 10.1 (6.1 to 16.7) for ReA). CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of amyloidosis among patients with SpA has strongly decreased in Spain. Amyloidosis is most strongly associated with SpA-IBD while the strength of association with PsA and ReA is similar to that with AS.

Abatacept in interstitial lung disease associated with rheumatoid arthritis: national multicenter study of 263 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of abatacept (ABA) in RA patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) (RA-ILD). METHODS: This was an observational, multicentre study of RA-ILD patients treated with at least one dose of ABA. ILD was diagnosed by high-resolution CT (HRCT). We analysed the following variables at baseline (ABA initiation), 12 months and at the end of the follow-up: Modified Medical Research Council (MMRC) scale (1-point change), forced vital capacity (FVC) or diffusion lung capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) (improvement or worsening ≥10%), HRCT, DAS on 28 joints evaluated using the ESR (DAS28ESR) and CS-sparing effect. RESULTS: We studied 263 RA-ILD patients [150 women/113 men; mean (s.d.) age 64.6 (10) years]. At baseline, they had a median duration of ILD of 1 (interquartile range 0.25-3.44) years, moderate or severe degree of dyspnoea (MMRC grade 2, 3 or 4) (40.3%), FVC (% of the predicted) mean (s.d.) 85.9 (21.8)%, DLCO (% of the predicted) 65.7 (18.3) and DAS28ESR 4.5 (1.5). The ILD patterns were: usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) (40.3%), non-specific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) (31.9%) and others (27.8%). ABA was prescribed at standard dose, i.v. (25.5%) or s.c. (74.5%). After a median follow-up of 12 (6-36) months the following variables did not show worsening: dyspnoea (MMRC) (91.9%); FVC (87.7%); DLCO (90.6%); and chest HRCT (76.6%). A significant improvement of DAS28ESR from 4.5 (1.5) to 3.1 (1.3) at the end of follow-up (P < 0.001) and a CS-sparing effect from a median 7.5 (5-10) to 5 (2.5-7.5) mg/day at the end of follow-up (P < 0.001) was also observed. ABA was withdrawn in 62 (23.6%) patients due to adverse events (n = 30), articular inefficacy (n = 27), ILD worsening (n = 3) and other causes (n = 2). CONCLUSION: ABA may be an effective and safe treatment for patients with RA-ILD.

Delphi-based recommendations for the management of cardiovascular comorbidities in patients with psoriatic arthritis and moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

The aim of this study was to generate practical recommendations to assist rheumatologists and dermatologists in the management of cardiovascular (CV) comorbidities in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis (MS-PSO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). A two-round Delphi study was conducted. A panel of experts rated their agreement with a set of statements (n = 52) on a nine-point Likert scale (1 = totally disagree; 9 = totally agree). Statements were classified as inappropriate (median 1-3), irrelevant (median 4-6) or appropriate (median 7-9). Consensus was established when at least two-thirds of the panel responded with a score within any one range. A total of 25 experts, 60% rheumatologists and 40% dermatologists, participated in two consultation rounds. There was overall unanimity on the appropriateness of an initial assessment for CV risk factors in all patients with MS-PSO and PsA. Most panelists (88.0%) also supported the evaluation of patients' psychological and physical status. Additionally, most panelists (72.2%) agreed on a novel sequential approach for the management of CV comorbidities. This sequence starts with the assessment of hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia along with the identification of depression and anxiety disorders. Once these factors are under control, smoking cessation programs might be initiated. Finally, if patients have not met weight loss goals with lifestyle modifications, they should receive specialized treatment for obesity. This study has drawn up a set of practical recommendations that will facilitate the management of CV comorbidities in patients with MS-PSO and PsA.

Mortality and prognostic factors in idiopathic inflammatory myositis: a retrospective analysis of a large multicenter cohort of Spain.

The present study was undertaken to assess mortality, causes of death, and associated prognostic factors in a large cohort of patients diagnosed with idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM) from Spain. A retrospective longitudinal study was carried out in 467 consecutive patients with IIM, identified from 12 medical centers. Patients were classified as primary polymyositis, primary dermatomyositis (DM), overlap myositis, cancer-associated myositis (CAM), and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. A total of 113 deaths occurred (24%) after a median follow-up time of 9.7 years. In the overall cohort, the 2-, 5-, and 10-year survival probabilities were 91.9, 86.7, and 77%, respectively. Main causes of death were infections and cancer (24% each). Multivariate model revealed that CAM (HR = 24.06), OM (HR = 12.00), DM (HR = 7.26), higher age at diagnosis (HR = 1.02), severe infections (HR = 3.66), interstitial lung disease (HR = 1.61), and baseline elevation of acute phase reactants (HR = 3.03) were associated with a worse prognosis, while edema of the hands (HR = 0.39), female gender (HR = 0.39), and longer disease duration (HR = 0.73) were associated with a better prognosis. The standardized mortality ratio was 1.56 (95% CI 1.28-1.87) compared to the Spanish general population. Our findings indicate that IIM has a high long-term mortality, with an excess of mortality compared to the Spanish population. A more aggressive therapy may be required in IIM patients presenting with poor predictive factors.

Barreras y facilitadores para la práctica del ejercicio físico en pacientes con espondiloartritis: estudio cualitativo de grupos focales (EJES-3D) / Barriers and facilitators for the practice of physical exercise in patients with spondyloarthritis: qualitative study of focus groups (EJES-3D)

Objetivos. Explorar las barreras que los pacientes con espondiloartritis (EsA) tienen ante el ejercicio y proponer facilitadores. Métodos. Análisis cualitativo del discurso en grupos focales para identificar los elementos que configuran la realidad estudiada, describir las relaciones entre ellos y sintetizar el resultado mediante: 1) segmentación según criterios temáticos; 2) categorización en función de situaciones, relaciones, opiniones, sentimientos u otras; 3) codificación de las diversas categorías, y 4) interpretación de los resultados. Resultados. Se realizaron 2 grupos focales de una hora de duración cada uno con 11 pacientes con EsA reclutados a partir de asociaciones y redes sociales en Madrid y provincias colindantes (64% hombres, 72% entre 40 y 60años y 57% con enfermedad de más de 10años; el 80% realizaba algún tipo de ejercicio o actividad física). Se identificaron: 1) barreras al ejercicio, entre las que destacaron: desinformación, miedo, dolor, desconfianza y experiencias previas negativas; 2) aspectos que facilitan la realización de ejercicio: los complementarios a las barreras más regularidad y apoyo profesional y social; 3) ítems que pueden influir tanto positiva como negativamente, y 4) cuatro fases del afrontamiento del ejercicio o actividad física en la EsA. Conclusión. Aparte de reconocer la existencia de factores personales poco modificables, en general los pacientes reclaman mayor conocimiento y educación sobre el ejercicio y sobre los pros y contras en el contexto de su enfermedad, coherencia de mensajes recibidos y mejores monitores que les acompañen en su afrontamiento frente a la enfermedad y al ejercicio (AU)

Objectives. To explore barriers to exercise of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) and to propose facilitators. Methods. Analysis of the speech of focus groups. It included the identification the elements that shape the studied reality, description of the relationship between them and synthesis through: 1) Thematic segmentation, 2) Categorization according to situations, relationships, opinions, feelings or others, 3) Coding of the various categories and 4) Interpretation of results. Results. Two focus groups of one hour each with 11 patients recruited from associations and social networks in Madrid and surrounding provinces took place (64% men, 72% between 40 and 60 years, 57% with disease duration longer than 10 years, 80% performed some type of exercise or physical activity). The following were identified: 1) barriers to exercise, among which the following pointed out: disinformation, fear, pain, distrust, and prior negative experiences with exercise; 2) facilitators to exercise: the complementary to barriers plus regularity and social and professional support; 3) items that could influence in either way, negative or positively; and 4) four phases of coping with exercise or physical activity in SpA. Conclusion. Apart from recognizing the existence of some modifiable personal factors, patients generally demand: more knowledge and education on exercise, including the pros and cons in the context of their disease, and coherence of messages received, together with better monitors that accompany them in their coping with disease and exercise (AU)

Barriers and Facilitators for the Practice of Physical Exercise in Patients With Spondyloarthritis: Qualitative Study of Focus Groups (EJES-3D). / Barreras y facilitadores para la práctica del ejercicio físico en pacientes con espondiloartritis: estudio cualitativo de grupos focales (EJES-3D).

OBJECTIVES: To explore barriers to exercise of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA) and to propose facilitators. METHODS: Analysis of the speech of focus groups. It included the identification the elements that shape the studied reality, description of the relationship between them and synthesis through: 1) Thematic segmentation, 2) Categorization according to situations, relationships, opinions, feelings or others, 3) Coding of the various categories and 4) Interpretation of results. RESULTS: Two focus groups of one hour each with 11 patients recruited from associations and social networks in Madrid and surrounding provinces took place (64% men, 72% between 40 and 60 years, 57% with disease duration longer than 10 years, 80% performed some type of exercise or physical activity). The following were identified: 1) barriers to exercise, among which the following pointed out: disinformation, fear, pain, distrust, and prior negative experiences with exercise; 2) facilitators to exercise: the complementary to barriers plus regularity and social and professional support; 3) items that could influence in either way, negative or positively; and 4) four phases of coping with exercise or physical activity in SpA. CONCLUSION: Apart from recognizing the existence of some modifiable personal factors, patients generally demand: more knowledge and education on exercise, including the pros and cons in the context of their disease, and coherence of messages received, together with better monitors that accompany them in their coping with disease and exercise.

Estándares de calidad asistencial para las consultas de enfermería en reumatología / Quality of care standards for nursing clinics in rheumatology

Introducción. Las consultas de enfermería en reumatología (CER) son modelos organizativos asistenciales en el ámbito de competencias de enfermería. Hay diversos modelos de CER, pero no existe una definición operacional. El objetivo del proyecto es elaborar estándares de calidad para definir y caracterizar una CER. Método. Estudio Delphi a 2 rondas. El panel estuvo constituido por 67 expertos: reumatólogos y enfermeras del Grupo de Trabajo de Enfermería de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología (SER). El cuestionario se elaboró tras revisión bibliográfica y experiencias de proyectos previos de la SER. El cuestionario consta de 7 apartados: consideraciones generales, estándares de estructura, de proceso, de tratamiento y seguimiento, educación sanitaria, formación e investigación y calidad asistencial. Cada ítem se puntuó de 1 (menos importante) a 9 (más importante) o mediante una cifra. El grado de acuerdo de los expertos se categorizó según el coeficiente de variación (CV) entre muy alto (CV ≤ 25%) y muy bajo (CV > 100%). Resultados. El cuestionario de la segunda ronda (182 ítems) fue respondido por 46 panelistas (34 reumatólogos y 12 enfermeras). Se obtuvo un grado de acuerdo muy importante en los estándares generales, de estructura, de proceso, de tratamiento y seguimiento, educación sanitaria y calidad asistencial. Se encontró menor acuerdo en los estándares relacionados con el tiempo para formación, el número de proyectos de investigación propios de enfermería y de publicaciones recomendables. Conclusión. Los estándares desarrollados en este estudio permitirían establecer mínimos deseables de calidad de estructura, proceso, labor asistencial, investigadora y docente que se pueden utilizar para desarrollar y evaluar las CER (AU)

Background. Nursing clinics in rheumatology (NCR) are organizational models in the field of nursing care. There are various NCR models, but there is no consensus on its operational definition. Our objective is to develop quality standards to define and characterize a NCR. Method. Two-round Delphi method. The panel consisted of 67 experts: rheumatologists and nurses of the nursing working group of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SSR). The Delphi questionnaire was developed after a literature and experience review from previous SSR projects. The questionnaire consists of 7 sections: general considerations, standards of structure, process, treatment and monitoring, health education, training and research and quality of care. Each item was scored from 1 (least important) to 9 (most important) or by assigning a number (e.g. waiting days). The degree of agreement among the experts was categorized according to the coefficient of variation (CoV) between very high (CoV≤25%) and very low (CoV>100%). Results. The second round questionnaire (182 items) was answered by 46 panelists (34 rheumatologists and 12 nurses). A very important agreement was reached on the general standards of structure, process, treatment and monitoring, health education and quality of care. Less agreement was observed on standards related to training time, number of recommended nurses’ research projects and publications. Conclusion. The standards developed in this study would be useful for establishing desirable quality standards of structure and process, and criteria for clinical work, research and teaching that can be used to develop and evaluate the NCRs (AU)

Quality of care standards for nursing clinics in rheumatology.

BACKGROUND: Nursing clinics in rheumatology (NCR) are organizational models in the field of nursing care. There are various NCR models, but there is no consensus on its operational definition. Our objective is to develop quality standards to define and characterize a NCR. METHOD: Two-round Delphi method. The panel consisted of 67 experts: Rheumatologists and nurses of the nursing working group of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology (SSR). The Delphi questionnaire was developed after a literature and experience review from previous SSR projects. The questionnaire consists of 7 sections: general considerations, standards of structure, process, treatment and monitoring, health education, training and research and quality of care. Each item was scored from 1 (least important) to 9 (most important) or by assigning a number (e.g., waiting days). The degree of agreement among the experts was categorized according to the coefficient of variation (CoV) between very high (CoV≤25%) and very low (CoV>100%). RESULTS: The second round questionnaire (182 items) was answered by 46 panelists (34 rheumatologists and 12 nurses). A very important agreement was reached on the general standards of structure, process, treatment and monitoring, health education and quality of care. Less agreement was observed on standards related to training time, number of recommended nurses' research projects and publications. CONCLUSION: The standards developed in this study would be useful for establishing desirable quality standards of structure and process, and criteria for clinical work, research and teaching that can be used to develop and evaluate the NCRs.

¿Se derivan adecuadamente las espondiloartropatías desde primaria a especializada? / Are spondyloarthropathies adequately referred from primary care to specialized care?

Objetivo. Evaluar el grado de acuerdo entre los médicos de atención primaria (MAP) y los reumatólogos en la valoración de los criterios de derivación en pacientes con sospecha de espondiloartritis (EspA) precoz. Material y métodos. Se derivaron los pacientes con sospecha de EspA precoz, a través de la plataforma electrónica, por MAP siguiendo unos criterios de derivación predeterminados a Unidades de EspA precoz, donde fueron de nuevo evaluados por reumatólogos y confirmados los diagnósticos. Se ha analizado la concordancia de los criterios de derivación predeterminados entre MAP y reumatólogos mediante el índice kappa (k) en aquellos pacientes con diagnóstico de EspA precoz. Resultados. Analizamos 802 pacientes, de los que el 8,31% fueron mal derivados. El grado de acuerdo en relación con criterios de derivación predeterminados fue pobre para la lumbalgia inflamatoria (k=0,16; intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC 95%] 0,09-0,23), sacroilitis radiológica (k=0,31; IC 95% 0,211-0,428), raquialgia o artralgia (k=0,21; IC 95% 0,14-0,29); moderado para el criterio de artritis asimétrica (k=0,51; IC 95% 0,43-0,59), HLA B27 positivo (k=0,59; IC 95% 0,52-0,67) e historia familiar (k=0,50; IC 95% 0,415-0,604). Los grados de acuerdo fueron buenos o muy buenos para la presencia de uveítis anterior (k=0,81; IC 95% 0,68-0,93), enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (k=0,87; IC 95% 0,79-0,96) y psoriasis (k=0,73; IC 95% 0,65-0,81). Conclusiones. El grado de acuerdo entre MAP y reumatólogos respecto a la valoración de los criterios preestablecidos para derivación de EspA precoz es variable. La concordancia es baja para criterios de derivación clave para el diagnóstico de pacientes con EspA. Facilitar programas de formación y entrenamiento para MAP resulta fundamental para identificar a pacientes con EspA precoz (AU)

Objective: To evaluate the degree of agreement between primary care physicians and rheumatologists when evaluating the referral criteria in patients with suspected early spondyloarthropathy (Spa). Material and methods: Patients with suspected early Spa (according to predefined clinical referral criteria) were sent by primary care physicians to early Spa units (where a rheumatologist evaluated the same criteria and confirmed the diagnosis) through an on-line platform. We assessed the agreement between primary care physicians and rheumatologists regarding the predefined clinical refererral criteria among patients with definitive Spa using the kappa index (k). Results: Eight hundred and two patients were analysed, 8.31% of whom were incorrectly referred to the rheumatologist. The degree of agreement regarding the predefined clinical referral criteria was poor for inflammatory back pain (k = 0.16; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.09-0.23), radiographic sacroiliitis (k = 0.31; 95% CI 0.211-0.428), back or joint pain (k = 0.21; 95% CI 0.14-0.29); mild for asymmetric arthritis (k = 0.51; 95% CI 0.43-0.59), positive HLA B27 (k = 0.59; 95% CI 0.52-0.67) and family history (k = 0.50; 95% CI 0.415-0.604); and it was good or very good for anterior uveitis (k = 0.81; 95% CI 0.68-0.93), inflammatory bowel disease (k = 0.87; 95% CI 0.79-0.96) and psoriasis (k = 0.73; 95% CI 0.65-0.81),. Conclusions: The degree of agreement between primary care physicians and rheumatologists regarding the predefined clinical referral criteria was variable. Agreement was very poor for variables like inflammatory back pain, which are crucial for the diagnosis of Spa. Training programs for primary care physicians are important in order for them to correctly identify early Spa patients (AU)

Are spondyloarthropathies adequately referred from primary care to specialized care?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the degree of agreement between primary care physicians and rheumatologists when evaluating the referral criteria in patients with suspected early spondyloarthropathy (Spa). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with suspected early Spa (according to predefined clinical referral criteria) were sent by primary care physicians to early Spa units (where a rheumatologist evaluated the same criteria and confirmed the diagnosis) through an on-line platform. We assessed the agreement between primary care physicians and rheumatologists regarding the predefined clinical referral criteria among patients with definitive Spa using the kappa index (k). RESULTS: Eight hundred and two patients were analysed, 8.31% of whom were incorrectly referred to the rheumatologist. The degree of agreement regarding the predefined clinical referral criteria was poor for inflammatory back pain (k=0,16; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0,09-0,23), radiographic sacroiliitis (k=0,31; 95% CI 0,211-0,428), back or joint pain (k=0,21; 95% CI 0,14-0,29); mild for asymmetric arthritis (k=0,51; 95% CI 0,43-0,59), positive HLA B27 (k=0,59; 95% CI 0,52-0,67) and family history (k=0,50; 95% CI 0,415-0,604); and it was good or very good for anterior uveitis (k=0,81; 95% CI 0,68-0,93), inflammatory bowel disease (k=0,87; 95% CI 0,79-0,96) and psoriasis (k=0,73; 95% CI 0,65-0,81),. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of agreement between primary care physicians and rheumatologists regarding the predefined clinical referral criteria was variable. Agreement was very poor for variables like inflammatory back pain, which are crucial for the diagnosis of Spa. Training programs for primary care physicians are important in order for them to correctly identify early Spa patients.

Mujer diagnosticada de espondilitis anquilosante con dolor dorsolumbar / No disponible

No disponible