'What is my risk really?': a qualitative exploration of preventive interventions among individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis.

Objectives: Intervention in the pre-arthritis phase of RA could prevent or delay the onset of disease. The primary aim of this study was to explore perspectives of being at risk and potential preventive interventions among individuals at risk of developing RA and to identify factors influencing their engagement with prevention. A secondary aim, established during the analytical process, was to understand and compare different approaches to health-related behaviours related to prevention of RA. Methods: Anti-CCP-positive (CCP+) at-risk individuals with musculoskeletal symptoms but no synovitis participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, followed by a secondary ideal-type analysis. Results: Nineteen CCP+ at-risk individuals (10 women; age range 35-70 years) participated. Three overarching themes were identified: being CCP+ at risk; aiming to prevent RA; and influencers of engagement. Participants described distress related to symptoms and uncertainty about disease progression. Many participants had concerns about medication side effects. In contrast, most participants expressed willingness to make lifestyle changes with the aim of preventing RA. Engagement with preventive measures was influenced by symptom severity, personal risk level, co-morbidities, experiences of taking other medications/supplements, knowledge of RA, risk factors and medications, and perceived effort. Three types of participants were identified from the data: proactive preventers, change considerers and fearful avoiders. Overall orientation to health behaviours also impacted the attitude towards preventing RA. Conclusion: Findings could inform recruitment and retention in RA prevention research and promote uptake of preventive interventions in clinical practice.

Patients' perspectives on systemic sclerosis-related Raynaud's phenomenon in the feet: A qualitative study from the OMERACT Foot and Ankle Working Group.

OBJECTIVE: To explore, from patients' perspectives, the symptoms and impact of Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) on the feet of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc-RP), and to identify which foot-related domains are important to patients. METHODS: Forty participants (34 women) with SSc-RP took part in one of six focus groups held in the United Kingdom or United States. Participants were purposively sampled to ensure diversity in disease type, duration, and ethnicity. The topic guide included questions on RP impact, self-management, and treatment expectations. Qualitative content analysis was employed to identify key concepts in the data relating to foot-specific symptoms and their impact. Themes were organized by corresponding domains of potential importance. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants (70 %) reported experiencing RP in their feet. Five themes were identified corresponding to domains of potential importance: temperature changes, pain, cramping and stiffness, numbness, and color changes. These issues negatively affected participants' lives, impairing walking, driving, and socializing, and causing issues with footwear and hosiery. CONCLUSIONS: This large qualitative study exploring the experiences of patients with SSc-RP in the feet identified several key domains of high importance to patients. SSc-RP is common in the feet, presents in several patterns, and impacts multiple aspects of patients' lives. These findings indicate where future foot-specific interventions for RP could be targeted. Findings from this study improve understanding of what domains are important to patients with SSc-RP affecting the feet and will contribute to the development of a core outcome set for foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

Evolving and evaluating the OMERACT fellows program: insights and implications from OMERACT 2023 fellows.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the evolution of the OMERACT Fellows Program (OM FP) and to evaluate the innovative changes implemented in the 2023 program. METHODS: The OM FP, the first of its kind in global rheumatology, was developed in 2000 to mentor early career researchers in methods and processes for reaching evidence-driven consensus for outcome measures in clinical studies. The OM FP has evolved through continuing iterations of face to face and online feedback. Key new features delivered in 2023 included e-learning modules, virtual introductory pre-meetings, increased networking with Patient Research Partners (PRPs), learning opportunities to give and receive personal feedback, ongoing performance feedback during the meeting from Fellow peers, PRPs, senior OMERACTers (members of the OMERACT community) and Emerging Leader mentors, involvement in pitching promotions, two-minute Lightning Talks in a plenary session and an embedded poster tour. An online survey was distributed after the meeting to evaluate the program. RESULTS: OM FP has included 208 fellows from 16 countries across 4 continents covering 47 different aspects of rheumatology outcomes since its inception. Over 50 % have remained engaged with OMERACT work. In 2023, 18 Fellows attended and 15 (83 %) completed the post-meeting survey. A dedicated OM FP was deemed important by all respondents, and 93 % would attend the meeting in future. The PRP/Fellow Connection Carousel and Lightning Talks were rated exceptional by 93 %. Key components to improve included clarification of expectations, overall workload, the Emerging Leaders Mentoring Program, and the content and duration of daily summary sessions. CONCLUSION: The innovations in the 2023 OM FP were well received by the majority of participants and supports early career rheumatology researchers to develop collaborations, skills and expertise in outcome measurement. Implementation of feedback from Fellows will enhance the program for future meetings, continuing to facilitate learning and succession planning within OMERACT.

Developing a core outcome set for foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: A scoping review and report from the OMERACT 2022 foot and ankle special interest group session.

OBJECTIVES: Foot and ankle involvement is common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases, yet high-quality evidence assessing the effectiveness of treatments for these disorders is lacking. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Foot and Ankle Working Group is developing a core outcome set for use in clinical trials and longitudinal observational studies in this area. METHODS: A scoping review was performed to identify outcome domains in the existing literature. Clinical trials and observational studies comparing pharmacological, conservative or surgical interventions involving adult participants with any foot or ankle disorder in the following rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) were eligible for inclusion: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), spondyloarthropathies, crystal arthropathies and connective tissue diseases. Outcome domains were categorised according to the OMERACT Filter 2.1. RESULTS: Outcome domains were extracted from 150 eligible studies. Most studies included participants with foot/ankle OA (63% of studies) or foot/ankle involvement in RA (29% of studies). Foot/ankle pain was the outcome domain most commonly measured (78% of studies), being the most frequently specified outcome domain across all RMDs. There was considerable heterogeneity in the other outcome domains measured, across core areas of manifestations (signs, symptoms, biomarkers), life impact, and societal/resource use. The group's progress to date, including findings from the scoping review, was presented and discussed during a virtual OMERACT Special Interest Group (SIG) in October 2022. During this meeting, feedback was sought amongst delegates regarding the scope of the core outcome set, and feedback was received on the next steps of the project, including focus group and Delphi methods. CONCLUSION: Findings from the scoping review and feedback from the SIG will contribute to the development of a core outcome set for foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. The next steps are to determine which outcome domains are important to patients, followed by a Delphi exercise with key stakeholders to prioritise outcome domains.

'It surprised me a lot that there is a link': a qualitative study of the acceptability of periodontal treatment for individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Current evidence suggests that periodontal disease could be a causal risk factor for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) onset and progression. Earlier periodontal intervention in individuals at risk of RA could provide a unique opportunity to prevent or delay the onset of RA. This study aimed to explore the acceptability of periodontal treatment as a measure to potentially prevent RA among at-risk individuals and healthcare professionals. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with anti-CCP positive at-risk individuals (CCP+ at risk) and a range of healthcare professionals. At-risk participant data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis; subsequent coding of healthcare professional data was deductive, based on a preidentified set of constructs. RESULTS: Nineteen CCP+ at-risk and 11 healthcare professionals participated. Three themes (six subthemes) were identified: (1) understanding risk (knowledge of shared at-risk factors; information and communication); (2) oral health perceptions and experiences (personal challenges and opportunities for dental intervention and oral health maintenance; external barriers) and (3) oral health treatment and maintenance (making oral health changes with the aim of preventing RA; acceptability of participation in periodontal research). CONCLUSIONS: Periodontal disease is common in individuals at risk of RA, but the impact of poor oral health may not be well understood. Oral health information should be tailored to the individual. CCP+ at-risk participants and healthcare professionals identified seeking dental treatment can be hindered by dental phobia, treatment costs or inability to access dentists. While CCP+ at-risk individuals may be reluctant to take preventive medications, a clinical trial involving preventive periodontal treatment is potentially acceptable.

Living with foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: A systematic review of qualitative studies to inform the work of the OMERACT Foot and Ankle Working Group.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine outcome domains of importance to patients living with foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), by exploring the symptoms and impact of these disorders reported in existing qualitative studies. METHODS: Six databases were searched from inception to March 2022. Studies were included if they used qualitative interview or focus group methods, were published in English, and involved participants living with RMDs (inflammatory arthritis, osteoarthritis, crystal arthropathies, connective tissue diseases, and musculoskeletal conditions in the absence of systemic disease) who had experienced foot and ankle problems. Quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative tool and confidence in the findings was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. All data from the results section of included studies were extracted, coded and synthesised to develop themes. RESULTS: Of 1,443 records screened, 34 studies were included, with a total of 503 participants. Studies included participants with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 18), osteoarthritis (n = 5), gout (n = 3), psoriatic arthritis (n = 1), lupus (n = 1), posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (n = 1), plantar heel pain (n = 1), Achilles tendonitis (n = 1), and a mixed population (n = 3), who live with foot and ankle disorders. Seven descriptive themes were generated from the thematic synthesis: pain, change in appearance, activity limitations, social isolation, work disruption, financial burden and emotional impact. Descriptive themes were inductively analysed further to construct analytical themes relating to potential outcome domains of importance to patients. Foot or ankle pain was the predominant symptom experienced by patients across all RMDs explored in this review. Based on grading of the evidence, we had moderate confidence that most of the review findings represented the experiences of patients with foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that foot and ankle disorders impact on multiple areas of patients' lives, and patients' experiences are similar regardless of the RMD. This study will inform the development of a core domain set for future foot and ankle research and are also useful for clinicians, helping to focus clinical appointments and measurement of outcomes within clinical practice.

Developing an Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Core set of Outcome Measures for FOot and ankle disorders in RheumaTic and musculoskeletal diseases (COMFORT): core domain set study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Foot and ankle involvement is common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). High-quality evidence is lacking to determine the effectiveness of treatments for these disorders. Heterogeneity in the outcomes used across clinical trials and observational studies hinders the ability to compare findings, and some outcomes are not always meaningful to patients and end-users. The Core set of Outcome Measures for FOot and ankle disorders in RheumaTic and musculoskeletal diseases (COMFORT) study aims to develop a core outcome set (COS) for use in all trials of interventions for foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. This protocol addresses core outcome domains (what to measure) only. Future work will focus on core outcome measurement instruments (how to measure). METHODS: COMFORT: Core Domain Set is a mixed-methods study involving the following: (i) identification of important outcome domains through literature reviews, qualitative interviews and focus groups with patients and (ii) prioritisation of domains through an online, modified Delphi consensus study and subsequent consensus meeting with representation from all stakeholder groups. Findings will be disseminated widely to enhance uptake. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol details the development process and methodology to identify and prioritise domains for a COS in the novel area of foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. Future use of this standardised set of outcome domains, developed with all key stakeholders, will help address issues with outcome variability. This will facilitate comparing and combining study findings, thus improving the evidence base for treatments of these conditions. Future work will identify suitable outcome measurement instruments for each of the core domains. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database, as of June 2022: https://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/2081.

"I could have a proper ankle" - a qualitative study of patients' perceptions of total ankle replacement and ankle fusion surgery.

BACKGROUND: End-stage ankle osteoarthritis typically causes severe pain and impaired function. Surgical treatment involves total ankle replacement (TAR) or ankle fusion. Definitive evidence about which procedure is optimal is lacking. No previous studies have thoroughly explored patients' experiences across the entire TAR/ankle fusion pathway. This study aimed to address this gap by exploring perceptions of surgery, education, rehabilitation and outcomes among patients who had undergone TAR or ankle fusion. METHODS: Seven participants were purposively selected from an orthopaedic centre in northern England (3 females, 4 males). Participants had undergone primary TAR without revision (n = 2), TAR requiring revision (n = 3) or ankle fusion (n = 2). Each participant completed a single semi-structured interview. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Three themes, each with two subthemes, were identified: decision-making (seeking help; surgical options), perceptions of support (information/education; clinical support) and impact on the individual (personal circumstances and beliefs; post-operative outcomes). Pain affecting participants' valued activities was key to their decision to seek help. Participants' decision between TAR and ankle fusion was influenced by multiple factors. Concerns regarding the lack of joint flexibility following fusion were highlighted, with some participants perceiving TAR as a "proper ankle" that would enable them to avoid limping. Participants obtained information from various sources, with most feeling that the education from their care team was inadequate. Participants' individual circumstances and beliefs influenced their decision-making and perceptions of their post-operative outcomes. Finally, whilst most participants were pleased with their outcomes, some experienced substantial ongoing problems such as difficulty walking and chronic pain. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of providing adequate education about TAR and ankle fusion to enable patients to make informed decisions. Most participants felt that the education and clinical support they received did not fully meet their needs. Participants' personal circumstances and beliefs had a strong influence on their decision-making and perceptions of their post-operative outcomes, highlighting the need to personally tailor education and clinical support. Future work with a larger sample of patients and other key stakeholders is required to develop consensus-based guidelines on pre- and post-operative support for patients undergoing TAR/ankle fusion.

A systematic review and narrative synthesis of footwear and orthotic devices used in the management of ankle haemarthrosis and haemarthropathy in haemophilia.

INTRODUCTION: Haemarthrosis is a clinical feature of haemophilia leading to haemarthropathy. The ankle joint is most commonly affected, resulting in significant pain, disability and a reduction in health-related quality of life. Footwear and orthotic devices are effective in other diseases that affect the foot and ankle, such as rheumatoid arthritis, but little is known about their effect in haemophilia. AIMS: To review the efficacy and effectiveness of footwear and orthotic devices in the management of ankle joint haemarthrosis and haemarthropathy in haemophilia. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted. Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion and appraised methodological quality using Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal checklists. A narrative analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Ten studies involving 271 male participants were eligible for inclusion. All studies were quasi-experimental; three employed a within-subject design. Two studies included an independent comparison or control group. A range of footwear and orthotic devices were investigated. Limited evidence from non-randomised studies suggested that footwear and orthotic devices improve the number of ankle joint bleeding episodes, gait parameters and patient-reported pain. CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates a lack of robust evidence regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of footwear and orthotic devices in the management of ankle joint haemarthrosis and haemarthropathy in haemophilia. Methodological heterogeneities and limitations with the study designs, small sample sizes and limited follow-up of participants exist. Future studies utilising randomised designs, larger sample sizes, long-term follow-up and validated patient-reported outcome measures are needed to inform the clinical management of ankle joint haemarthrosis and haemarthropathy.

Perceptions and experiences of individuals at-risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) knowing about their risk of developing RA and being offered preventive treatment: systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.

OBJECTIVES: There is increasing interest in identifying individuals at-risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and initiating early treatment to prevent or delay the onset of arthritis. We aimed to describe the perceptions and experiences of at-risk individuals and to inform the conduct of clinical trials and studies, and clinical practice. METHODS: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies was conducted. Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, appraised their methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and assessed confidence in the findings using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research approach. RESULTS: Seven studies involving 115 individuals at-risk of developing RA were included. Three major themes (seven subthemes) were identified: understanding the risk of developing RA (knowledge of RA and identification of potential risk factors); preventive interventions to reduce the risk of developing RA (understanding the value and role of preventive interventions, and engagement with preventive interventions); and perceptions of predictive testing for RA (benefits of predictive testing, decision to undertake predictive testing and concerns about predictive testing). Moderate confidence in most review findings was evident. CONCLUSION: While there are clear benefits in informing individuals at-risk of RA about their risk following predictive testing and offering preventive treatment, there are potential barriers to engagement, intensified by the burden of uncertainty. Identification of the optimum approaches for presenting risk information, including the risks and benefits of engaging with preventive interventions, is urgently needed to support individuals at-risk of RA in their decision making. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021236034.

Foot orthoses for people with rheumatoid arthritis: a survey of prescription habits among podiatrists.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend foot orthoses for people with both early (< 2 years) and established rheumatoid arthritis (RA). While prefabricated foot orthoses are cheaper and can exhibit comparable effects to customised devices, the available evidence for their effectiveness is inconsistent. Little is known about what types of foot orthoses clinicians prescribe. This study describes the foot orthoses prescription habits of podiatrists for people with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-three podiatrists from the United Kingdom (UK) (n = 88), Australia (n = 68) and New Zealand (n = 27) completed a self-administered, online survey regarding the types of foot orthoses prescribed in clinical practice for people with RA. This study forms part of a wider international survey exploring foot orthosis prescription habits. RESULTS: UK respondents were more likely to prescribe prefabricated orthoses for early RA (n = 47, 53%) and customised orthoses for established RA (n = 47, 53%). Respondents in Australia were more likely to prescribe customised orthoses for both early (n = 32, 47%) and established (n = 46, 68%) RA, whilst respondents in New Zealand were more likely to prescribe prefabricated orthoses for both early (n = 16, 59%) and established (n = 10, 37%) disease.Irrespective of disease stage, the use of foam impression boxes was more prevalent in the UK and New Zealand when capturing a model of the feet prior to manufacturing customised orthoses. In contrast, electronic scanning and plaster of Paris were more common in Australia. Computer aided manufacture was utilised more frequently among respondents in Australia than in the UK and New Zealand. Respondents in all three countries specified more flexible shell materials for established RA, compared to early disease. Cushioning top covers (e.g. PORON® or polyurethane) were most frequently specified in all countries for both disease stages. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable variation was seen in the self-reported foot orthoses prescription habits of respondents for people with RA. Variation between countries and disease stage was seen in type of orthoses, specific brands, manufacturing methods, and materials prescribed. The results allow podiatrists and broader health service providers to compare their practice against reported national and international patterns.

A survey of foot orthoses prescription habits amongst podiatrists in the UK, Australia and New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Foot orthoses are frequently used but little is known about which types are used in contemporary practice. This study aimed to explore the types of foot orthoses currently used by podiatrists and the prescription variations in a range of conditions. METHODS: A web-based, cross-sectional survey was distributed through professional bodies in the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, and New Zealand. Questions focussed on foot orthosis prescription habits in relation to 26 conditions affecting the back and lower limb. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-four podiatrists practising in 19 different countries completed the survey; the majority practised in the UK (47%, n = 124), Australia (30%, n = 79) and New Zealand (12%, n = 32). Respondents qualified between 1968 and 2016, and 147 (56%) were female. Respondents worked in different healthcare sectors and this varied between countries: 42 (34%) respondents in the UK worked solely in the public sector, compared to 3 (4%) in Australia and 2 (6%) in New Zealand. Forty-four (35%) respondents in the UK worked solely in private practice, compared to 64 (81%) in Australia and 14 (44%) in New Zealand.UK respondents prescribed more prefabricated orthoses per week (mean 5.5 pairs) than simple insole-type devices (±2.7) and customised devices (±2.9). Similarly, respondents in New Zealand prescribed more prefabricated orthoses per week (±7.7) than simple (±1.4) and customised (±2.8) devices. In contrast, those in Australia prescribed more customised orthoses per week (±4.4) than simple (±0.8) and prefabricated (±1.9) orthoses. Differences in the types of orthoses prescribed were observed between country of practice, working sector, and the condition targeted. Generally, prefabricated orthoses were commonly prescribed for the 26 highlighted conditions in the UK and New Zealand. Australian podiatrists prescribed far fewer devices overall, but when they did prescribe, they were more likely to prescribe custom devices. Respondents in all three countries were more likely to prescribe customised orthoses for people with diabetes complicated by peripheral neuropathy than for diabetes without this complication. CONCLUSIONS: Foot orthosis prescription habits vary between countries. Prefabricated orthoses were frequently prescribed in the UK and New Zealand, and customised orthoses in Australia. Prescriptions for people with diabetes differed depending on the presence of neuropathy, despite a lack of robust evidence supporting these decisions. This study provides new insight into contemporary practice.