BackgroundWe systematically reviewed current guidelines for managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to evaluate their range and nature, assess variations in their recommendations and highlight divergence in their perspectives.MethodsWe searched Medline and Embase databases using the terms ‘clinical practice guidelines’ and ‘rheumatoid arthritis’ from January 2000 to January 2017 together with publications of national and international bodies. We included guidelines providing recommendations on general RA management spanning a range of treatments and published in English. We undertook narrative assessments due to the heterogeneity of the guidelines.ResultsWe identified 529 articles; 22 met our inclusion criteria. They were primarily developed by rheumatologists with variable involvement of patient and other experts. Three dealt with early RA, one established RA and 18 all patients. Most guidelines recommend regular assessments based on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology core dataset; 18 recommended the disease activity score for 28 joints. Twenty recommended targeting remission; 16 suggested low disease activity as alternative. All guidelines recommend treating active RA; 13 made recommendations for moderate disease. The 21 guidelines considering early RA all recommended starting disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) as soon as possible; methotrexate was recommended for most patients. Nineteen recommended combination DMARDs when patients failed to respond fully to monotherapy and biologics were not necessarily indicated. Twenty made recommendations about biologics invariably suggesting their use after failing conventional DMARDs, particularly methotrexate. Most did not make specific recommendations about using one class of biologics preferentially. Eight recommended tapering biologics when patients achieved sustained good responses.ConclusionsFive general principles transcend most guidelines: DMARDs should be started as soon as possible after the diagnosis; methotrexate is the best initial treatment; disease activity should be regularly monitored; give biologics to patients with persistently active disease who have already received methotrexate; remission or low disease activity are the preferred treatment target.

BackgroundIn patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) clinical measures of disease activity may not reliably discriminate between patients with active inflammatory disease and those with concomitant fibromyalgia (FM). Recent work has shown RA patients with a 28 tender joint count (TJC) minus swollen joint count (SJC) of 7 or more (joint count criteria) are more likely to meet classification criteria for FM. This study aimed to determine whether RA patients meeting clinical criteria for FM had lower levels of joint inflammation as determined by ultrasound (US).MethodsRA patients with DAS28 > 2.6 were recruited. Patients underwent clinical assessment including ultrasound examination of the hands and wrists with quantification of grey scale (GS) and power Doppler (PD) synovitis. Patients completed questionnaires to assess pain, fatigue, disability and psychological comorbidity.ResultsPatients meeting either of the FM criteria had higher scores for disease activity, depression, disability and fatigue. Those meeting both the joint count and classification FM criteria had significantly lower levels of GS and PD inflammation on US.ConclusionsRA patients with concomitant FM, as determined by widespread soft tissue tenderness but fewer clinically inflamed joints, have higher disease activity scores but may have lower levels of synovial inflammation on US. This has implications for the identification and management of these patients who may not respond to conventional therapy and hence be more suitable for alternative approaches to treatment.

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment paradigms have shifted over the last two decades. There has been increasing emphasis on combination disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy, newer biologic therapies have become available and there is a greater focus on achieving remission. We have evaluated the impact of treatment changes on disease activity scores for 28 joints (DAS28) and disability measured by the health assessment questionnaire scores (HAQ).MethodsFour cross-sectional surveys between 1996 and 2014 in two adjacent secondary care rheumatology departments in London evaluated changes in drug therapy, DAS28 and its component parts and HAQ scores (in three surveys). Descriptive statistics used means and standard deviations (SD) or medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) to summarise changes. Spearman’s correlations assessed relationships between assessments.Results1324 patients were studied. Gender ratios, age and mean disease duration were similar across all cohorts. There were temporal increases in the use of any DMARDs (rising from 61 % to 87 % of patients from 1996-2014), combination DMARDs (1 % to 41 %) and biologic (0 to 32 %). Mean DAS28 fell (5.2 to 3.7), active disease (DAS28 > 5.1) declined (50 % to 18 %) and DAS28 remission (DAS28 < 2.6) increased (8 % to 28 %). In contrast HAQ scores were unchanged (1.30 to 1.32) and correlations between DAS28 and HAQ weakened (Spearman’s rho fell from 0.56 to 0.44).ConclusionsTreatment intensity has increased over time, disease activity has fallen and there are more remissions. However, these improvements in controlling synovitis have not resulted in comparable reductions in disability measured by HAQ. As a consequence the relationship between DAS28 and HAQ has become weaker over time. Although the reasons for this divergence between disease activity and disability are uncertain, focussing treatment entirely in suppressing synovitis may be insufficient.