BackgroundReaching the therapeutic target of remission or low-disease activity has improved outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) significantly. The treat-to-target recommendations, formulated in 2010, have provided a basis for implementation of a strategic approach towards this therapeutic goal in routine clinical practice, but these recommendations need to be re-evaluated for appropriateness and practicability in the light of new insights.ObjectiveTo update the 2010 treat-to-target recommendations based on systematic literature reviews (SLR) and expert opinion.MethodsA task force of rheumatologists, patients and a nurse specialist assessed the SLR results and evaluated the individual items of the 2010 recommendations accordingly, reformulating many of the items. These were subsequently discussed, amended and voted upon by >40 experts, including 5 patients, from various regions of the world. Levels of evidence, strengths of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived.ResultsThe update resulted in 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. The previous recommendations were partly adapted and their order changed as deemed appropriate in terms of importance in the view of the experts. The SLR had now provided also data for the effectiveness of targeting low-disease activity or remission in established rather than only early disease. The role of comorbidities, including their potential to preclude treatment intensification, was highlighted more strongly than before. The treatment aim was again defined as remission with low-disease activity being an alternative goal especially in patients with long-standing disease. Regular follow-up (every 1–3 months during active disease) with according therapeutic adaptations to reach the desired state was recommended. Follow-up examinations ought to employ composite measures of disease activity that include joint counts. Additional items provide further details for particular aspects of the disease, especially comorbidity and shared decision-making with the patient. Levels of evidence had increased for many items compared with the 2010 recommendations, and levels of agreement were very high for most of the individual recommendations (≥9/10).ConclusionsThe 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations are based on stronger evidence than before and are supposed to inform patients, rheumatologists and other stakeholders about strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA.
Objective. To compare the efficacy of a single intraarticular corticosteroid injection, a supervised physiotherapy program, a combination of the two, and placebo in the treatment of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder.Methods. Ninety-three subjects with adhesive capsulitis of <1 year's duration were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment groups: group 1, corticosteroid injection (triamcinolone hexacetonide 40 mg) performed under fluoroscopic guidance followed by 12 sessions of supervised physiotherapy; group 2, corticosteroid injection alone; group 3, saline injection followed by supervised physiotherapy; or group 4, saline injection alone (placebo group). All subjects were taught a simple home exercise program. Subjects were reassessed after 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. The primary outcome measure was improvement in the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score.Results. At 6 weeks, the total SPADI scores had improved significantly more in groups 1 and 2 compared with groups 3 and 4 (P ؍ 0.0004). The total range of active and passive motion increased in all groups, with group 1 having significantly greater improvement than the other 3 groups. At 3 months, groups 1 and 2 still showed significantly greater improvement in SPADI scores than group 4. There was no difference between groups 3 and 4 at any of the followup assessments except for greater improvement in the range of shoulder flexion in group 3 at 3 months. At 12 months, all groups had improved to a similar degree with respect to all outcome measures.Conclusion. A single intraarticular injection of corticosteroid administered under fluoroscopy combined with a simple home exercise program is effective in improving shoulder pain and disability in patients with adhesive capsulitis. Adding supervised physiotherapy provides faster improvement in shoulder range of motion. When used alone, supervised physiotherapy is of limited efficacy in the management of adhesive capsulitis.Adhesive capsulitis is a common cause of shoulder pain and disability. It is characterized by spontaneous onset of shoulder pain accompanied by progressive limitation of both active and passive glenohumeral movement (1). The pathophysiology of idiopathic adheSupported by a grant from the Arthritis Society of Canada.
These recommendations were developed based on a synthesis of international guidelines, supporting evidence, and expert consensus considering the Canadian healthcare context with the intention of promoting best practices and improving healthcare delivery for persons with RA.
ABSTRACT. Objective. The Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) has developed recommendations for the pharmacological management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with traditional and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in 2 parts. Part II, focusing on specific safety aspects of treatment with traditional and biologic DMARD in patients with RA, is reported here. Methods. Key questions were identified a priori based on results of a national needs-assessment survey. A systematic review of all clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements regarding treatment with traditional and biologic DMARD in patients with RA published between January 2000 and June 2010 was performed in Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases, and was supplemented with a "grey literature" search including relevant public health guidelines. Systematic reviews of postmarketing surveillance and RA registry studies were performed to update included guideline literature reviews as appropriate. Guideline quality was independently assessed by 2 reviewers. Guideline characteristics, recommendations, and supporting evidence from observational studies and randomized trials were synthesized into evidence tables. The working group voted on recommendations using a modified Delphi technique.Results. Thirteen recommendations addressing perioperative care, screening for latent tuberculosis infection prior to the initiation of biologic DMARD, optimal vaccination practices, and treatment of RA patients with active or a history of malignancy were developed for rheumatologists, other primary prescribers of RA drug therapies, and RA patients. Conclusion. These recommendations were developed based on a synthesis of international RA and public health guidelines, supporting evidence, and expert consensus in the context of the Canadian health system. They are intended to help promote best practices and improve healthcare delivery for persons with RA. (First Release June 15 2012; J Rheumatol 2012;39:1583-602; doi:10.3899 Recommendations provided here are intended to be read in conjunction with the Canadian Rheumatology Association Recommendations for the Pharmacological Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis. These recommendations address specific safety questions that were identified a priori and are not intended to cover all safety aspects concerning treatment with traditional and biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD).Traditional and biologic DMARD have greatly enhanced the care of persons with rheumatoid arthritis (RA); however, potential risks associated with their use need be considered. The Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) has developed recommendations for the pharmacological management of RA with traditional and biologic DMARD in 2 parts. Part I described the development process of CRA recommendations in detail and included 5 overarching RA care principles along with 26 treatment recommendations 1 . Part II, reported here, focuses on specific safety aspects of treatment with traditional and biologic DMARD in patients with ...
Early mortality in SSc is substantial, and prevalent cohorts underestimate mortality in SSc by failing to capture early deaths, particularly in men and those with diffuse disease.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.