Systematic literature review informing the EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological management of systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic sclerosis

Through this systematic literature review, we assembled evidence to inform the EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and systemic sclerosis (SSc). We screened articles published between January 2000 and June 2021. Studies selected for data extraction (118 for SLE and 92 for SSc) were thematically categorised by the character of their intervention. Of 208 articles included, 51 were classified as robust in critical appraisal. Physical activity was the most studied management strategy and was found to be efficacious in both diseases. Patient education and self-management also constituted widely studied topics. Many studies on SLE found psychological interventions to improve quality of life. Studies on SSc found phototherapy and laser treatment to improve cutaneous disease manifestations. In summary, non-pharmacological management of SLE and SSc encompasses a wide range of interventions, which can be combined and provided either with or without adjunct pharmacological treatment but should not aim to substitute the latter when this is deemed required. While some management strategies i.e., physical exercise and patient education, are already established in current clinical practice in several centres, others e.g., phototherapy and laser treatment, show both feasibility and efficacy, yet require testing in more rigorous trials than those hitherto conducted.

Randomized controlled trial of an internet-based self-guided hand exercise program to improve hand function in people with systemic sclerosis: the Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network Hand Exercise Program (SPIN-HAND) trial

BACKGROUND

Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma; SSc) is a rare autoimmune connective tissue disease. Functional impairment of hands is common. The Scleroderma Patient-centered Intervention Network (SPIN)-HAND trial compared effects of offering access to an online self-guided hand exercise program to usual care on hand function (primary) and functional health outcomes (secondary) in people with SSc with at least mild hand function limitations.

METHODS

The pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group cohort multiple randomized controlled trial was embedded in the SPIN Cohort. Cohort participants with Cochin Hand Function Scale (CHFS) scores ≥ 3 and who indicated interest in using the SPIN-HAND Program were randomized (3:2 ratio) to an offer of program access or to usual care (targeted N = 586). The SPIN-HAND program consists of 4 modules that address (1) thumb flexibility and strength; (2) finger bending; (3) finger extension; and (4) wrist flexibility and strength. The primary outcome analysis compared CHFS scores 3 months post-randomization between participants offered versus not offered the program. Secondary outcomes were CHFS scores 6 months post-randomization and functional health outcomes (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System profile version 2.0 domain scores) 3 and 6 months post-randomization.

RESULTS

In total, 466 participants were randomized to intervention offer (N = 280) or usual care (N = 186). Of 280 participants offered the intervention, 170 (61%) consented to access the program. Of these, 117 (69%) viewed at least one hand exercise instruction video and 77 (45%) logged into the program website at least 3 times. In intent-to-treat analyses, CHFS scores were 1.2 points lower (95% CI - 2.8 to 0.3) for intervention compared to usual care 3 months post-randomization and 0.1 points lower (95% CI - 1.8 to 1.6 points) 6 months post-randomization. There were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The offer to use the SPIN-HAND Program did not improve hand function. Low offer uptake, program access, and minimal usage among those who accessed the program limited our ability to determine if using the program would improve function. To improve engagement, the program could be tested in a group format or as a resource to support care provided by a physical or occupational therapist.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03419208 . Registered on February 1, 2018.

Rehabilitation Interventions in Systemic Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Future Directions

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review evidence of rehabilitation interventions for improving outcomes in systemic sclerosis (SSc) and to evaluate evidence quality.

METHODS

Several electronic databases were searched to identify studies in which rehabilitation professionals delivered, supervised, or participated in interventions for individuals with SSc. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomized trials, one-arm trials, and prospective quasi-experimental studies with interventions were included if they had ≥10 participants. Quality appraisal was conducted by 2 independent raters using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 16 good or excellent quality studies (15 RCTs, 1 prospective quasi-experimental study) were included. Most rehabilitation interventions focused on hands/upper extremities, followed by multicomponent, orofacial, and directed self-management. Sample sizes varied between 20-267 participants (median 38). In 50% of studies, participants in intervention groups significantly improved compared to controls. Most studies demonstrated within-group improvements in intervention groups. Interventions varied in content, delivery, length, and dose and outcome measures collected.

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence provides some support for rehabilitation in SSc, such as interventions that focus on hand and upper extremity outcomes or are multicomponent, although there is high study heterogeneity. The evidence base would benefit from interventions testing similar replicable components, use of common outcome measures, and incorporation of delivery modes that enable larger sample sizes. There are challenges in recruiting participants due to the rarity of SSc and high disease burden, as participants' involvement in rehabilitation studies requires active participation over time. Intervention studies designed to reduce participation barriers may facilitate translation of effective interventions into practice.

Exercise as a multi-modal disease-modifying medicine in systemic sclerosis: An introduction by The Global Fellowship on Rehabilitation and Exercise in Systemic Sclerosis (G-FoRSS)

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a heterogeneous multisystem autoimmune disease whereby its main pathological drivers of disability and damage are vascular injury, inflammatory cell infiltration, and fibrosis. These mechanisms result in diffuse and diverse impairments arising from ischemic circulatory dysfunction leading to painful skin ulceration and calcinosis, neurovascular aberrations hindering gastrointestinal (GI) motility, progressive painful, incapacitating or immobilizing effects of inflammatory and fibrotic effects on the lungs, skin, articular and periarticular structures, and muscle. SSc-related impairments impede routine activities of daily living (ADLs) and disrupt three critical life areas: work, family, social/leisure, and also impact on psychological well-being. Physical activity and exercise are globally recommended; however, for connective tissue diseases, this guidance carries greater impact on inflammatory disease manifestations, recovery, and cardiovascular health. Exercise, through myogenic and vascular phenomena, naturally targets key pathogenic drivers by downregulating multiple inflammatory and fibrotic pathways in serum and tissue, while increasing circulation and vascular repair. G-FoRSS, The Global Fellowship on Rehabilitation and Exercise in Systemic Sclerosis recognizes the scientific basis of and advocates for education and research of exercise as a systemic and targeted SSc disease-modifying treatment. An overview of biophysiological mechanisms of physical activity and exercise are herein imparted for patients, clinicians, and researchers, and applied to SSc disease mechanisms, manifestations, and impairment. A preliminary guidance on exercise in SSc, a research agenda, and the current state of research and outcome measures are set forth.

Suitability for e-health of non-pharmacological interventions in connective tissue diseases: scoping review with a descriptive analysis

Objective

Non-pharmacological interventions support patients with connective tissue diseases to better cope with and self-manage their diseases. This study aimed to map existing evidence on non-pharmacological interventions in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc) and mixed connective tissue diseases regarding content, feasibility and potential suitability in an e-health setting.

Methods

A literature search was performed in eight different databases in July 2020. The intervention’s content was extracted using the ‘Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide’. A Sankey diagram and descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data and illustrate the relationships between the interventions.

Results

Of 8198 identified records, 119 papers were eligible. One hundred and four of them (87.4%) were conducted between 2000 and 2020, mainly in the USA (SLE n=24 (21.2%), SSc n=16 (14.2%)), Brazil (SLE n=8 (7.1%), SSc n=5 (4.4%)) and Italy (SLE n=0 (0%), SSc n=12 (10.6%)). Fifty-two studies (SLE n=24 (21.2%), SSc n=28 (24.8%)) used multicomponent interventions. The single interventions were physical exercises (SLE n=16 (14.2%), SSc n=17 (15.0%)), coaching/counselling (SLE n=11 (18.0%), SSc n=0 (0%)) and education (SLE n=2 (1.8%), SSc n=3 (2.7%)). Primary outcomes focused on physical function (SLE n=1 (0.9%), SSc n=15 (13.3%)), mouth opening in SSc (n=4 (5.9%)) and physical capacity (SLE n=2 (1.8%), SSc n=1 (0.9%)). No interventions for mixed connective tissue disease were found.

Conclusion

There was a great variety in the intervention’s content due to differences in body structure, activity limitations and participation restrictions in SLE and SSc. These results highlight the need for personalised, multicomponent, non-pharmacological interventions, which could be delivered as e-health interventions.