Abstract
Abstract
Background
Clinical experience has shown that a single measure is not sufficient to assess disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Various clinimetric tools are necessary to address the many clinical situations that can arise.
Methods
In order to develop a comprehensive measurement tool, the Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology searched for the most frequent measures of disease activity applied in RA by means of a semi-systematic review of the available literature.
Results
We found that the most frequently reported measures of disease activity were the 28-joint Disease Activity Score, C-reactive protein, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, followed by patient-reported measures of pain and stiffness and many other composite indices and patient-reported outcome measures. The most frequent physician-reported sign of disease was the swollen joint count, and the most frequently self-reported feature was the increase in disease activity or flares.
Conclusion
In this article, we present a new clinimetric tool developed based on expert consensus and on data retrieved from our search. Disease activity can be better assessed by combining various data sources, such as clinical, laboratory, and self-reported outcomes. These variables were included in our novel clinimetric tool.
Key Points• The goal of treatment of RA is to achieve the best possible control of inflammation, or even remission; therefore, disease management should include systematic and regular evaluation of inflammation and health status.• Clinimetric tools evaluate a series of variables (e.g., symptoms, functional capacity, disease severity, quality of life, disease progression) and can reveal substantial prognostic and therapeutic differences between patients.• Our clinimetric tool, which is based on a combination of data (e.g., clinical variables, laboratory results, PROMs), can play a relevant role in patient assessment and care.
Funder
Pontifical Xavierian University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference33 articles.
1. Finckh A, Gilbert B, Hodkinson B, Bae SC, Thomas R, Deane KD, Alpizar-Rodriguez D, Lauper K (2022) Global epidemiology of rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol 18(10):591–602. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41584-022-00827-y
2. Scott IC, Whittle R, Bailey J, Twohig H, Hider SL, Mallen CD, Muller S, Jordan KP (2022) Rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis epidemiology in England from 2004 to 2020: an observational study using primary care electronic health record data. Lancet Reg Health Eur 23:100519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2022.100519
3. van Delft ETAM, Jamal M, den Braanker H, Kuijper TM, Hazes JMW, Lopes Barreto D, Weel-Koenders AEAM (2022) A systematic review on time trend incidence of rheumatoid arthritis in outpatient rheumatology clinics. Front Med (Lausanne) 9:933884. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.933884
4. Almutairi K, Nossent J, Preen D, Keen H, Inderjeeth C (2021) The global prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis based on a systematic review. Rheumatol Int 41(5):863–877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-020-04731-0
5. Fernández-Ávila DG, Rincón-Riaño DN, Bernal-Macías S, Gutiérrez Dávila JM, Rosselli D (2019) Prevalencia de la artritis reumatoide en Colombia según información del Sistema Integral de Información de la Protección Social. Rev Colomb Reumatol 26:83–87