How to Collect an MDHAQ to Provide Rheumatology Vital Signs (Function, Pain, Global Status, and RAPID3 Scores) in the Infrastructure of Rheumatology Care, Including Some Misconceptions Regarding the MDHAQ

36-40% of Routine Care Patients With Osteoarthritis or Rheumatoid Arthritis Screen Positive for Anxiety, Depression, and/or Fibromyalgia on a Single MDHAQ

OBJECTIVE

Osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are associated with similar patient disease burdens and a high prevalence of comorbid anxiety (ANX), depression (DEP), and fibromyalgia (FM). Nonetheless, these comorbidities are infrequently assessed in routine care, in part because multiple questionnaires are not feasibly completed by patients. We analyzed the prevalence of ANX, DEP, and FM in patients with OA versus patients with RA seen in routine care using indices within a single Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) and associations with \ Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) and its component function, pain, and patient global scores.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of MDHAQ data in unselected patients with OA or RA receiving routine care at one setting included four indices within an MDHAQ: MDHAQ ANX screen, MDHAQ DEP screen, Fibromyalgia Assessment Screening Tool, and RAPID3. The prevalence of each comorbidity and associations with RAPID3 and components were analyzed in unadjusted and age-adjusted (Mantel-Haenszel) odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Overall, 40.4% of 361 patients with OA and 36.3% of 488 patients with RA screened positive for ANX, DEP, and/or FM (8.1% and 7% for all three, respectively). RAPID3 and each component were elevated significantly in patients with any positive screen result for ANX, DEP, and/or FM in both diagnoses (ORs of 2.6-35.8).

CONCLUSION

FM, DEP, and/or ANX rates were 40.4% in patients with OA and 36.3% in patients with RA, associated with significantly poorer patient status measures. Each of these three common comorbidities of patient distress may be feasibly screened for on a single MDHAQ in routine care.

Fibromyalgia Assessment Screening Tools (FAST) Based on Only Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) Scores as Clues to Fibromyalgia

Objective

The study was designed to develop fibromyalgia assessment screening tool (FAST) indices based only on multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) scores as clues to fibromyalgia (FM), analyzed for possible agreement with the 2011 FM criteria.

Methods

All patients with all diagnoses complete an MDHAQ at each visit in routine care. The MDHAQ includes scores for physical function, pain, global assessment, fatigue, self-report painful joint count, and a 60-symptom checklist. MDHAQ items similar or identical to the 2011 FM criteria symptom severity scale (SSS) and widespread pain index (WPI) components of a polysymptomatic distress scale (PSD) were compiled into continuous MDHAQ-FM-SSS, MDHAQ-FM-WPI, and MDHAQ-FM-PSD indices. Ten candidate MDHAQ scores were analyzed against the 2011 FM criteria using descriptive statistics, Spearman correlations, kappa statistics, and receiver operating characteristic curves for the area under the curve (AUC). MDHAQ candidate variables with the highest AUC were compiled into cumulative MDHAQ-FAST indices of three (FAST3) or four (FAST4) scores.

Results

The highest AUCs among MDHAQ scores were seen for symptom checklist, painful joint count, fatigue, and pain, which are included in FAST4; FAST3-F excludes pain, and FAST3-P excludes fatigue. AUCs for FAST3-P, FAST3-F, and FAST4, as well as continuous MDHAQ-FM scores, all were greater than 0.92, indicating excellent criterion validity. Kappa statistics versus the 2011 criteria were 0.63-0.68, higher than 0.41-0.47 versus physician ICD-10 diagnoses.

Conclusion

Pragmatic FAST3, FAST4, and MDHAQ-FM indices are similar to FM criteria to screen for FM in routine care. It is more feasible to collect the same MDHAQ, which is informative in all rheumatic diseases studied, from each patient than to ask different patients with different diagnoses to complete different questionnaires.

MDHAQ/RAPID3 scores in patients with osteoarthritis are similar to or higher than in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional study from current routine rheumatology care at four sites

Objective

To compare patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) versus rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for scores on a patient self-report MDHAQ/RAPID3 (Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire/Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3), and for physician global assessment (DOCGL).

Methods

All patients with all diagnoses complete an MDHAQ/RAPID3 at all routine rheumatology visits in the waiting area before seeing a rheumatologist at four sites, one in Australia and three in the USA. The two-page MDHAQ includes 0–10 scores for physical function (in 10 activities), pain and patient global assessment [on 0–10 visual analogue scales (VAS)], compiled into a 0–30 RAPID3, as well as fatigue and self-report painful joint count scales. Rheumatologists estimate a 0–10 DOCGL VAS. Demographic, MDHAQ/RAPID3 and DOCGL data from a random visit were compared in patients with RA versus patients with OA using multivariate analysis of variance, adjusted for age, disease duration and formal education level.

Results

Median RAPID3 was higher in OA versus RA at all four sites (11.7–16.8 vs 6.2–11.8) (p<0.001 at three sites). Median DOCGL in OA versus RA was 5 vs 4, 4 vs 3.7, 2.2 vs 2.5 and 2 vs 1. Patterns were similar for individual RAPID3 items, fatigue and painful joint scales, and in stratified analyses of patients aged 55–70.

Conclusion

Patient MDHAQ/RAPID3 and physician DOCGL indicate similar or higher disease burden in OA versus RA. Routine MDHAQ/RAPID3 allows direct comparisons of the two diseases. The findings suggest possible revision of current clinical and public policy views concerning OA.

Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) Scores Yield Similar Information in 85 Korean Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis Seen in Usual Clinical Care

Disease-specific ankylosing spondylitis (AS) indices, including BASDAI (Bath AS Disease Activity Index), BASFI (Bath AS Functional Index), ASDAS (AS Disease Activity Score), and BASMI (Bath AS Metrology Index), are widely used in clinical trials and in some clinical settings, but not in most routine care. Laboratory tests usually are the only quantitative measures included in routine care of AS patients, but often are poorly informative. Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) on a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) is feasible and informative in many rheumatic diseases.

Prediction of Remission in a French Early Arthritis Cohort by RAPID3 and other Core Data Set Measures, but Not by the Absence of Rheumatoid Factor, Anticitrullinated Protein Antibodies, or Radiographic Erosions

Objective.

To identify baseline variables that predict remission according to different criteria in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a comprehensive French ESPOIR early arthritis database.

Methods.

Individual variables and indices at baseline were analyzed in 664 patients for capacity to predict remission either 6 or 12 months later according to 4 criteria that require a formal joint count: the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Boolean criteria, the Simplified Disease Activity Index, the Clinical Disease Activity Index, and the 28-joint Disease Activity Score; and 2 remission criteria that do not require a formal joint count: the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) and the RAPID3 ≤ 3 + swollen joint, using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions.

Results.

Remission was predicted significantly 6 and/or 12 months later in 26.8%–51.4% of patients, according to all 6 criteria by younger age, low index scores, and better status for the 6/7 clinical RA core dataset measures: tender joint count, swollen joint count (SJC), physician’s global estimate, patient self-report Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) physical function, pain, and patient’s global estimate. Remission was not predicted by the absence of “poor prognosis RA” indicators, rheumatoid factor (RF), anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA), or radiographic erosions. In multivariate regressions that included only 3 variables, low HAQ function predicted remission by all criteria as effectively as SJC, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, or C-reactive protein.

Conclusion.

Younger age and 6 core dataset clinical measures, but not the absence of traditional “poor prognosis RA” indicators, RF, ACPA, or radiographic erosions, predicted remission according to 6 criteria, including 2 without a formal joint count.

MDHAQ/RAPID3 to recognize improvement over 2 months in usual care of patients with osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, spondyloarthropathy, and gout, as well as rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze whether MDHAQ (Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire) scores for physical function (FN), pain, Patient Global Estimate (PATGL), and RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data, a composite of these 3 measures) document improvement in patients with osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, spondyloarthropathy, and gout, similarly to rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

In a solo rheumatology practice, every patient completes an MDHAQ/RAPID3 and is assigned a Physician Global Estimate (DOCGL) at every visit. Mean and median FN (0-10 scale), pain (0-10), PATGL (0-10), RAPID3 (0-30), and DOCGL (0-10) were computed at first visit and 2 months later in 141 new patients with 5 diagnoses. Proportions with RAPID3 high (>12), moderate (6.1-12), and low (3.1-6) severity and remission (≤3) were computed. Differences between baseline and 2-month follow-up for each diagnosis were analyzed using paired t tests. Mean changes over 2 months across 5 diagnoses were compared using analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Mean baseline scores for all measures were in narrow ranges for all 5 diagnoses: FN 1.5 to 2.5, pain 4.2 to 5.9, PATGL 4.3 to 5.6, RAPID3 10.1 to 13.7, and DOCGL 2.4 to 4.0. Improvement for FN was 9.4% to 26.8% in all diagnoses but osteoarthritis, for pain 20.2% to 35.3% in all diagnoses, PATGL 11.3% to 30.4%, RAPID3 16.8% to 27.5%, and for DOCGL 23.8% to 36.4%, similar in 5 diagnostic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MDHAQ, RAPID3, and DOCGL document similar baseline and improvement scores in patients with 5 diagnoses. These quantitative data may supplement traditional narrative, "gestalt" descriptions in usual care of patients with any rheumatic disease.

Can remission in rheumatoid arthritis be assessed without laboratory tests or a formal joint count? possible remission criteria based on a self-report RAPID3 score and careful joint examination in the ESPOIR cohort

OBJECTIVE

To explore 5 possible criteria for remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) based on a patient self-report index, the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3), with a careful joint examination and possible physician global estimate (DOCGL), but without a formal joint count or laboratory test.

METHODS

The ESPOIR early RA cohort of 813 French patients recruited in 2002-2005 was analyzed to identify patients in remission 6 months after enrollment, according to 2 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria: Boolean ≤ 1 for total tender joint count-28, swollen joint count-28, C-reactive protein, and patient global estimate (PATGL), and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) ≤ 3.3. Agreement with 7 other remission criteria was analyzed - Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28) ≤ 2.6, Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤ 2.8, and 5 candidate criteria based on RAPID3, joint examination, and DOCGL: "RAPID3R" (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0); "RAPID3R+SJ1" (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0, ≤ 1 swollen joint); "RAPID3R+SJ1+D1" (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0, ≤ 1 swollen joint, DOCGL ≤ 1); "RAPID3R+SJ0" (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0, 0 swollen joints); and "RAPID3R+SJ0+D1" (RAPID3 ≤ 3.0, 0 swollen joints, DOCGL ≤ 1), according to kappa statistics, sensitivity, and specificity. Residual global, articular, and questionnaire abnormalities according to each criteria set were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 813 ESPOIR patients, 720 had complete data to compare all 9 possible criteria. Substantial agreement with the Boolean criteria was seen for SDAI, CDAI, RAPID3R+SJ1, RAPID3R+SJ1+D1, RAPID3R+SJ0, and RAPID3R+SJ0+D1 (92.2%-94.7%, kappa 0.67-0.79), versus only moderate agreement for DAS28 or RAPID3R (79.9%-85.8%, kappa 0.46-0.55).

CONCLUSION

Remission according to CDAI and RAPID3R+SJ1, but not DAS28 or RAPID3R, is similar to that of the ACR/EULAR criteria. RAPID3 scores require a complementary careful joint examination for clinical decisions, do not preclude formal joint counts or other indices, and may be useful in busy clinical settings.

Usefulness of patients-reported outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis focus group

Objective. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become an essential part of the assessment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We aimed to evaluate the agreement and correlation between PROs and the physician's measurements. Methods. This was a cross-sectional analytical study in which 135 patients with RA were clinically evaluated during two different sessions of focus group interviews. Rheumatologist recorded 28 swollen (SJCs) and tender joint counts (TJCs). The patients filled out the PROs instruments (MDHAQ, RADAI, RAPID3, 4, and 5 and self-report articular index (SAI) diagram for pain and joint swelling). DAS28 was calculated (C-reactive protein). An adjusted multiple lineal regression model was done (DAS28 as dependent variable). Results. Highly significant agreements were found between SJC and TJC registered by the physician and patient. There was moderate correlation between DAS28 with patient SJC (r = 0.52), patient TJC (r = 0.55), RADAI (r = 0.56), RAPID3 (r = 0.52), RAPID4 (r = 0.56), RAPID5 (r = 0.66), and VAS-Global (r = 0.51). Likewise, we found moderate to high correlations between CDAI and SDAI with all variable measurements done by the patients. The resulting predictive equation was DAS28(CRP) = 2.02 + 0.037 × RAPID4 + 0.042× patient SJC. Conclusion. PROs applied in focus groups interview are a useful tool for managing patients with RA regardless of gender, educational level, and duration of disease.

Proposed Severity and Response Criteria for Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3): Results for Categories of Disease Activity and Response Criteria in Abatacept Clinical Trials

Background.

An index is needed to assess the status of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as none of the existing measures are applicable to all individual patients. The 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) is the most specific and widely used index. Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3) is an index containing only the 3 patient self-report core dataset measures, without a laboratory test or formal joint count, and with simple scoring. RAPID3 is correlated significantly with DAS28, but calculated in 5–10 seconds on a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ), compared to 114 seconds for DAS28.

Methods.

DAS28 (0–10 scale) categories for high, moderate, and low activity, and remission (≤ 2.6, 2.6–3.2, 3.21–5.1, and > 5.1, respectively) and proposed RAPID3 (0–30 scale) categories for severity (0 ≤ 3, 3.1–6, 6.1–12, and > 12) were compared in patients taking abatacept and control-treated patients at the endpoint of the Abatacept in Inadequate Response to Methotrexate (AIM) and the Abatacept Trial in Treatment of Anti-TNF INadequate Responders (ATTAIN) clinical trials, using cross-tabulations and kappa statistics.

Results.

Overall, 92%–99% of patients classified as having high DAS28 activity had high or moderate RAPID3 severity, while 64%–83% in DAS28 remission had RAPID3 low severity or remission; 50%–82% of patients with good or poor EULAR responses had good or poor RAPID3 responses. Kappa values ranged from 0.25 to 0.48, and weighted kappas from 0.32 to 0.52, indicating fair to moderate agreement for the 2 indices.

Conclusion.

Proposed RAPID3 severity and response categories yield comparable results to DAS28 and EULAR criteria in AIM and ATTAIN. DAS28 is more specific for clinical trials. RAPID3 does not preclude also scoring DAS28, and may be informative in the infrastructure of routine care.

RAPID3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3) severity categories and response criteria: Similar results to DAS28 (Disease Activity Score) and CDAI (Clinical Disease Activity Index) in the RAPID 1 (Rheumatoid Arthritis Prevention of Structural Damage) clinical trial of certolizumab pegol

OBJECTIVE

To compare categories for activity/severity according to the Disease Activity Score 28-joint count (DAS28), the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), and the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), an index without formal joint counts calculated in 5 versus >100 seconds, as well as the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)- DAS28 and the RAPID3 response criteria, in the Rheumatoid Arthritis Prevention of Structural Damage (RAPID 1) clinical trial of certolizumab pegol (CZP).

METHODS

Post hoc analyses were performed using correlations, cross-tabulations, and kappa statistics. Patients (treated with CZP plus methotrexate [MTX] or placebo plus MTX) were classified at baseline and at 52 weeks as high, moderate, low activity/severity or remission, according to the DAS28 (>5.1, >3.2 to ≤5.1, 2.6 to ≤3.2, <2.6 [total range 0-10]), the CDAI (>22, >10 to ≤22, >2.8 to ≤10, ≤2.8 [total range 0-76]), and RAPID3 (>12, >6 to ≤12, >3 to ≤6, ≤3 [total range 0-30]), as well as for good, moderate, and poor EULAR-DAS28 and proposed RAPID3 response criteria.

RESULTS

All measures were correlated significantly: RAPID3 with DAS28 and CDAI (rho > 0.7), higher than erythrocyte sedimentation rate with C-reactive protein level (rho = 0.47). At 52 weeks, DAS28, CDAI, and RAPID3 low activity/remission was seen in 30%, 44%, and 42% of CZP-treated patients versus 3%, 7%, and 10% of control patients. Good, moderate, and poor EULAR-DAS28 responses were seen in 30%, 51%, and 19% of CZP-treated patients versus 3%, 28%, and 70% of control patients, and for RAPID3 in 39%, 30%, and 32% of CZP-treated patients versus 8%, 16%, and 76% of control patients. Kappa and weighted kappa values ranged from 0.36-0.53, indicating fair to moderate agreement.

CONCLUSION

RAPID3, DAS28, and CDAI give similar results to distinguish CZP patients from controls in the RAPID 1 clinical trial. DAS28 is specific for clinical trials; RAPID3 appears pragmatically useful for usual care.

Poor physical function, pain and limited exercise: risk factors for premature mortality in the range of smoking or hypertension, identified on a simple patient self-report questionnaire for usual care

OBJECTIVE

To analyse poor physical function, pain, limited exercise and smoking, assessed in a patient-friendly self-report questionnaire format that has been completed by every patient at every visit over 20-30 years in the authors' and other usual care settings, to predict 5-year mortality in a general older population.

METHODS

An extended version of a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire was mailed to 2000 subjects in Finland, identified as a randomly selected control cohort for a rheumatoid arthritis cohort. The questionnaire included queries concerning baseline physical function, pain, exercise and smoking status, identical to the clinic version, as well as age and 25 medical conditions. Five-year survival was analysed according to descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regressions.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was returned by 1523 subjects (76%). Five-year survival was 94% in all subjects, 98% in subjects with no disease or no acutely life-threatening disease, and 17% in subjects with an acutely life-threatening disease. Hazard ratios (HRs) for 5-year mortality were 3.5 for poor physical function, 2.2 for pain, 5.2 for limited exercise and 4.6 for smoking (p<0.01); 5-year survivals were 93%, 97%, 93% and 95%, respectively, compared with 91% for hypertension. Each of the four patient history variables predicted mortality at higher levels in subjects who reported no versus one or more acutely life-threatening conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor physical function, pain, limited exercise and smoking can be assessed systematically on a simple standard Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire, to identify potentially modifiable risk factors for premature mortality in the infrastructure of usual medical care and health maintenance.

Screening for low literacy in a rheumatology setting: more than 10% of patients cannot read "cartilage," "diagnosis," "rheumatologist," or "symptom"

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the study were to analyze literacy in 194 consecutive patients at an academic rheumatology setting with the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) and an "Arthritis-Adapted" REALM (A-REALM), and to compare responses to one another and to demographic and clinical measures.

METHODS

The REALM and A-REALM are two 66-item word recognition tests. Both were administered to 194 consecutive patients in usual rheumatology care. Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) scores for physical function, pain, fatigue, and global estimate, and laboratory assessments also were available. Descriptive statistics and analyses of agreement were computed.

RESULTS

REALM and A-REALM administration involved 2 to 3 minutes each. Scores below 61, indicating a reading level at eighth grade or less, were seen in 35 (18%) of 194 patients on the REALM and 46 patients (24%) on the A-REALM. No patient was classified as having severely low literacy at or below a third-grade level. However, words not read correctly by 10% or more of the patients on the REALM included diagnosis (14%), osteoporosis (17%), and inflammatory (10%), and on the A-REALM, rheumatologist (11%), cartilage (14%), and symptom (14%). REALM and A-REALM scores were correlated significantly (Pearson r = 0.94, P < 0.001). Almost all patients (33/35) with REALM scores of less than 61 also had A-REALM scores of less than 61, less formal education, and poorer clinical status on all measures, most not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Low literacy is an important underrecognized problem in medical care, which may be assessed easily in standard care using the REALM or A-REALM. Further attention to literacy-associated barriers may reduce socioeconomic disparities in health.