Report from the OMERACT Hand Osteoarthritis Special Interest Group: advances and future research priorities

High Frequency of Osteophytes Detected by High-Resolution Ultrasound at the Finger Joints of Asymptomatic Factory Workers

Hand Osteoarthritis (HOA) is a frequently occurring musculoskeletal disease that impacts health. Diagnostic criteria often incorporate osteophytes documented through imaging procedures. Radiographic imaging is considered the gold standard; however, more sensitive and safer methods like ultrasound imaging are becoming increasingly important. We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study to examine the prevalence, grade, and pattern of osteophytes using high-resolution ultrasound investigation. Factory workers were recruited on-site for the study. Each participant had 26 finger joints examined using ultrasonography to grade the occurrence of osteophytes on a semi-quantitative scale ranging from 0-3, where higher scores indicate larger osteophytes. A total of 427 participants (mean age 53.5 years, range 20-79 years) were included, resulting in 11,000 joints scored. At least one osteophyte was found in 4546 out of 11,000 (41.3%) joints or in 426 out of 427 (99.8%) participants, but only 5.0% (553) of the joints showed grade 2 or 3 osteophytes. The total osteophyte sum score increased by 0.18 per year as age increased (p < 0.001). The distal interphalangeal joints were the most commonly affected, with 61%, followed by the proximal interphalangeal joints with 48%, carpometacarpal joint 1 with 39%, and metacarpophalangeal joints with 16%. There was no observed impact of gender or workload. In conclusion, ultrasound imaging proves to be a practical screening tool for osteophytes and HOA. Grade 1 osteophytes are often detected in the working population through ultrasound assessments and their incidence increases with age. The occurrence of grade 2 or 3 osteophytes is less frequent and indicates the clinical presence of HOA. Subsequent evaluations are imperative to ascertain the predictive significance of early osteophytes.

Exercise Therapy for Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis: Is There An Ideal Prescription?

Purpose of review

Exercise therapy is the first line treatment for patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) but is consistently underutilized. In this review, we aim to provide health care professionals with an overview of the latest evidence in the areas of exercise therapy for OA, which can serve as a guide for incorporating the ideal exercise therapy prescription in the overall management plan for their patients with OA.

Recent findings

Evidence continues to be produced supporting the use of exercise therapy for all patients with knee or hip OA. Ample evidence exists suggesting exercise therapy is a safe form of treatment, for both joint structures and the patient overall. Several systematic reviews show that exercise therapy is likely to improve patient outcomes, regardless of disease severity or comorbidities. However, no single type of exercise therapy is superior to others.

Summary

Health care practitioners and patients should be encouraged to incorporate exercise therapy into treatment plans and can be assured of the safety profile and likelihood of improvement in important patient outcomes. Since no single exercise therapy program shows vastly superior benefit, patient preference and contextual factors should be central to the shared decision-making process when selecting and individualising appropriate exercise therapy prescriptions.

Can we change the natural course of inflammatory bowel disease?

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), including Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are lifelong diseases characterized by chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract leading to its progressive and irreversible destruction. Whether early initiation of IBD-specific therapy impacts the long-term course of the disease remains unclear and has to be further explored in prospective disease-modification trials. Historically, surgery and hospitalization rates have been the surrogate markers to measure disease progression in IBD, providing an overview of the effectiveness of medical therapies. However, neither surgery nor hospitalization necessarily reflects a fail in therapeutic medical management, and many confounding factors make them biased outcomes. The Selecting Endpoints for Disease-Modification Trials consensus has defined the disease-modification endpoints required for these trials, including the impact of the disease on patient's life (health-related quality of life, disability, and fecal incontinence), the mid-term disease complications (bowel damage in CD, IBD-related surgery and hospitalizations, disease extension in UC, extra-intestinal manifestations, permanent stoma, short bowel syndrome), and the development of dysplasia/cancer and mortality in the long term. Most available data in the literature regarding the impact of current therapies on disease progression focused on anti-tumor necrosis factor agents and are based on retrospective or post-hoc studies. Thus, prospective disease-modification trials are pressingly required to explore the effectiveness of early intensified treatment in patients with severe disease or at risk for disease progression.

What impact does osteoarthritis have on ability to self-care and receipt of care in older adults? Findings from the Hertfordshire Cohort Study

Objectives

Living independently remains the aim of older adults, but musculoskeletal conditions and frailty may hamper this. We examined relationships between osteoarthritis with ability to self-care and access to formal/informal care among community-dwelling older adults, comparing results to relationships between other musculoskeletal conditions of ageing (frailty, sarcopenia, osteoporosis) and these outcomes.

Design

Data from the Hertfordshire Cohort Study were used. Osteoarthritis (hand, hip or knee) was defined by clinical examination. Osteoporosis was assessed using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and medication use. Sarcopenia was assessed using EWSGOP2 criteria, frailty using Fried criteria. Ability to self-care and access to formal/informal care were self-reported.

Results

443 men and women aged approximately 75 years participated. Osteoarthritis was reported by 26.8% participants; 11.8% had low grip strength; 21.4% had osteoporosis; 8.6% had sarcopenia; 7.6% were identified as frail. Most participants (90.7%) reported no problems with self-care, but more than one-fifth (21.4%) reported having received formal or informal care at home in the previous year. Odds of reporting difficulties with self-care were significantly greater (p ​< ​0.05) for participants with osteoarthritis and for those with frailty, but not for those with osteoporosis or sarcopenia. Odds of receiving care at home in the past year were significantly greater among participants with osteoarthritis and among those with frailty, but not among those with osteoporosis or sarcopenia.

Conclusions

Frailty and osteoarthritis were associated with both difficulties with self-care and receipt of care; osteoporosis and sarcopenia were not. These results highlight the contribution of clinical osteoarthritis to ability to live independently in later life, and the need to actively manage the condition in older adults.

Research priorities to reduce the impact of musculoskeletal disorders: a priority setting exercise with the child health and nutrition research initiative method

Involving research users in setting priorities for research is essential to ensure the outcomes are patient-centred and maximise its value and impact. The Musculoskeletal Disorders Research Advisory Group Versus Arthritis led a research priority setting exercise across musculoskeletal disorders. The Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method of setting research priorities with a range of stakeholders was used, involving four stages and two surveys, to: (1) gather research uncertainties, (2) consolidate these, (3) score uncertainties against importance and impact, and (4) analyse scoring for prioritisation. 213 people responded to the first survey and 285 people to the second, representing clinicians, researchers, and people with musculoskeletal disorders. Key priorities included developing and testing new treatments, better treatment targeting, early diagnosis, prevention, and better understanding and management of pain, with an emphasis on understanding underpinning mechanisms. We present a call to action to researchers and funders to target these priorities.

Patient-Centered Core Impact Sets: What They are and Why We Need Them

A quote attributed to Mark Twain states, “What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know. It’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.” The growing focus on patient centricity has revealed a misalignment between what patients report as important to them about their disease and/or treatment, and the data collected in research and care. Decisions across healthcare are made using an evidence base most stakeholders acknowledge is inadequate. Patients might report that what is important to them are everyday life impacts, concepts that can be very different from the more typical clinical outcomes we often track. In this paper, we encourage expanding current thinking to all “impacts,” not only health outcomes, but also the other equally (and sometimes more important) concerns patients report as important to them. We propose that a patient-centered core impact set be developed for each disease or condition of interest, and/or subpopulation of patients. A patient-centered core impact set begins with gathering from patients and caregivers an inventory of all impacts disease and treatments have on a patient’s (and carers’ and families’) life. Then, through a formal prioritization process, a core set of impacts is derived, inclusive of but extending beyond relevant health outcomes. We offer several recommendations on how to move the goal of a patient-centered core impact set forward through collaboration, leadership, and establishment of a patient-centered core impact set development blueprint with supporting tools.

The Measure of Activity Performance of the hand (MAP-Hand) - A reliable and valid questionnaire for use in patients with hand osteoarthritis with specific involvement of the thumb

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional methodological study with test-retest design.

INTRODUCTION

The Measure of Activity Performance of the Hand (MAP-Hand) is an assessment tool measuring hand-related activity limitations.

PURPOSE

To assess reliability, validity, and interpretability of the MAP-Hand in patients with hand osteoarthritis with specific involvement of the thumb (CMC1).

METHODS

One hundred-and-eighty patients referred to surgical consultation for hand osteoarthritis affecting the CMC1 were included in the evaluation of validity and interpretability. Among these, 59 stable patients were included in reliability analyses, completing the questionnaire twice with a 2-week retest interval. The MAP-Hand has 18 predefined and 5 optional patient-specific items, scored on a 4-point scale (1 = no difficulty to 4 = not able to do). Relative (ICC_2.1) and absolute (SDC_95%ind) reliability were calculated. An ICC of >0.70 was considered acceptable. Nine (75%) or more of 12 predetermined hypotheses had to be confirmed for acceptable construct validity. Interpretability was assessed using floor and ceiling effects and considered present if 15% scored at eitherend of the scale.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) age was 63 (8) years, and most patients were women (79%). The mean total score of predefined items showed acceptable reliability (ICC_2.1 0.74, SDC_95%ind 0.60) and construct validity. The mean total score of the patient-specific items did not reach acceptable reliability. Ceiling effect was found for the predefined items.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We found that the mean total score of the predefined items on MAP-Hand had acceptable reliability and construct validity but a ceiling effect in patients with hand osteoarthritis with CMC1 affection.

Evolving Short- and Long-Term Goals of Management of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Getting It Right, Making It Last

Short- and long-term treatment targets in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) evolved during the last decade, shifting from symptom control to endoscopic healing and patient-centered parameters. The STRIDE-II consensus placed these targets on a timeline from initiating treatment and introduced additional targets, normalization of serum and fecal biomarkers, restoration of quality of life, prevention of disability, and, in children, restoration of growth. Transmural healing in Crohn's disease and histologic healing in ulcerative colitis currently serve as adjunct measures to gauge remission depth. However, whether early treatment according to a treat-to-target paradigm affects the natural course of IBD remains unclear, leading to the need for prospective disease-modification trials. The SPIRIT consensus defined the targets for these trials to assess the long-term impact of early treatment on quality of life, disability, disease complications, risk of neoplastic lesions, and mortality. As further data emerge about the risk-benefit balance of aiming toward deeper healing, the targets in treating IBDs may continue to shift.

Intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide injections in hands osteoarthritis ‒ A double-blinded randomized controlled trial with a one year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

to evaluate the effectiveness of triamcinolone Hexacetonide (TH) Intra-Articular Injection (IAI) in hand Interphalangeal Joints (IP) of Osteoarthritis (OA) patients to improve pain and joint swelling; improve function, goniometry, and grasping force, and assess IAI influence on radiographic evolution over 1-year.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind study. 60 patients who underwent IAI at the most symptomatic IP joint were randomly assigned to receive TH+Lidocaine (LD) (TH/LD group) or just LD (LD group). Patients were assessed blindly for 1-year, at baseline and 1, 4, 8, 12, and 48 weeks. The following variables were assessed: articular pain and swelling, AUSCAN and COCHIN functional questionnaires, grip and pinch strength, goniometry, perception of improvement, acetaminophen consumption, and simple radiography. Repeated-measures ANOVA test was used to analyze the intervention response.

RESULTS

Sixty patients completed the follow-up. There were nine missed assessments. 97% were women; mean age of 61-years (SD = 8.2), and approximately 5-years of disease (SD = 3.6). Half of the patients present radiographic classification Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grades I and II, and the other half grades III and IV. The two groups evolved similarly at 48-weeks. TH/LD group had a better evaluation in joint swelling and acetaminophen consumption (p = 0.04 and p < 0.001, respectively) at 48-weeks. Radiographically there was no statistical difference between groups (KL, p = 0.564; erosive OA, p = 0.999; worsening, p = 0.573).

CONCLUSION

The IAI IP hands OA is effective for the improvement of joint swelling and decrease of analgesic consumption and does not influence the radiographic evolution of the injected joint.

Efficacy of a Combination of Conservative Therapies vs an Education Comparator on Clinical Outcomes in Thumb Base Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

A combination of conservative treatments is commonly used in clinical practice for thumb base osteoarthritis despite limited evidence for this approach.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of a 6-week combination of conservative treatments compared with an education comparator.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized, parallel trial with 1:1 allocation ratio among people aged 40 years and older with symptomatic and radiographic thumb base osteoarthritis in a community setting in Australia.

INTERVENTIONS

The intervention group (n = 102) received education on self-management and ergonomic principles, a base-of-thumb splint, hand exercises, and diclofenac sodium, 1%, gel. The comparator group (n = 102) received education on self-management and ergonomic principles alone. Intervention use was at participants' discretion from 6 to 12 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Hand function (Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis; 0-30) and pain (visual analog scale; 0-100 mm) were measured at week 6 (primary time point) and week 12. An α of .027 was used at week 6 to account for co-primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 204 participants randomized, 195 (96%) and 194 (95%) completed follow-ups at 6 and 12 weeks, respectively; the mean (SD) age of the population was 65.6 (8.1) years, and 155 (76.0%) were female. At week 6, hand function improved significantly more in the intervention group than the comparator (between-group difference, -1.7 units; 97.3% CI, -2.9 to -0.5; P = .002). This trend was sustained at 12 weeks (-2.4 units; 95% CI, -3.5 to -1.3; P < .001). Pain scores improved similarly at week 6 (between-group difference, -4.2 mm; 97.3% CI, -11.3 to 3.0; P = .19). At week 12, pain reduction was significantly greater in the intervention group (-8.6 mm; 95% CI, -15.2 to -2.0; P = .01). There were 34 nonserious adverse events, all in the intervention group-mostly skin reactions and exercise-related pain exacerbations.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial of people with thumb base osteoarthritis, combined treatments provided small to medium and potentially clinically beneficial effects on hand function but not pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ACTRN12616000353493.

Selecting End Points for Disease-Modification Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: the SPIRIT Consensus From the IOIBD

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), encompassing Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are chronic and disabling disorders. Prospective disease-modification trials to prevent disease progression are eagerly awaited. However, disease progression is not clearly defined. The objective of the Selecting End PoInts foR Disease-ModIfication Trials (SPIRIT) initiative was to achieve international expert consensus on the endpoints to be used in future IBD-disease modification trials.

METHODS

This initiative under the auspices of the International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IOIBD) began with a systematic literature search to evaluate the current evidence on the definition of disease progression in IBD. On October 22, 2019, a consensus meeting took place during the United European Gastroenterology Week (UEGW) Congress in Barcelona, during which predefined proposed statements were discussed in a plenary session and voted on anonymously. Agreement was defined as at least 75% of participants voting for any one statement.

RESULTS

The group agreed that the ultimate therapeutic goal in both CD and UC is to prevent disease impact on patient's life (health-related quality of life, disability, fecal incontinence), midterm complications (encompass bowel damage in CD, IBD-related surgery and hospitalizations, disease extension in UC, extraintestinal manifestations, permanent stoma, short bowel syndrome), and long-term complications (gastrointestinal and extraintestinal dysplasia or cancer, mortality).

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations on which goals to achieve in disease-modification trials for preventing disease progression in patients with IBD are proposed by the SPIRIT consensus. However, these recommendations will require validation in actual clinical studies before implementation in disease-modification trials.

Protocol of the Development of a Core Outcome Set for Ischemic Stroke in Clinical Trials of Chinese Medicine

Background. Ischemic stroke (IS) seriously impacts the quality of life of survivors. Chinese medicine (CM) has been developed for more than 2000 years and plays a key role in the treatment of ischemic stroke. Many Chinese medicine clinical trials have been conducted; however, the heterogeneity of outcome measurements and reporting limits implications of the findings in clinical practice and health policy development. Therefore, it is important to develop a core outcome set (COS) that should be used and reported in trials for ischemic stroke treated by Chinese medicine. This protocol describes the process of developing the IS-CM-COS. Methods and Analysis. The development of the COS will involve the following four steps: (1) A list of outcomes reported in the registered and published Chinese medicine trials of ischemic stroke will be extracted by conducting a systematic literature review. (2) An additional outcome list will be collected by semistructured interview to patients with ischemic stroke. (3) A two-round Delphi survey will be performed to prioritize and condense the outcomes. (4) In the consensus meeting, a final recommended COS will be developed. Discussion. The COS could improve the reliability and consistency of outcome reporting. We hope that this IS-CM-COS will be used in the future Chinese medicine trials for the treatment of ischemic stroke and improve research quality. Trial Registration. This study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative (http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1282).

Get a Grip on Factors Related to Grip Strength in Persons With Hand Osteoarthritis: Results From an Observational Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare levels of grip strength in individuals with hand osteoarthritis (OA) with normative values, and to examine how hand OA severity and other biopsychosocial factors are associated with grip strength.

METHODS

Levels of grip strength across age groups were compared with normative values from the general population in sex-stratified analyses using 2-sample t-tests. Associations between radiographic hand OA severity (Kellgren/Lawrence sum score) in different joint groups and grip strength of the same hand were examined in 300 individuals from the Nor-Hand study using linear regression. Analyses were repeated using markers of pain, demographic factors, comorbidities, and psychological and social factors as independent variables. We adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index.

RESULTS

Individuals with hand OA had lower grip strength than the general population, especially in individuals age <60 years. In thumb base joints, increasing radiographic severity (range 0-8) and the presence of pain were associated with lower grip strength (β = -0.83 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -1.12, -0.53] and β = -2.15 [95% CI -3.15, -1.16], respectively). Negative associations with grip strength were also found for women, low education, higher comorbidity index, and higher resting heart rate.

CONCLUSION

Individuals with hand OA have lower grip strength than the general population. Our results support the idea that studies on thumb base OA should include grip strength as an outcome measure. However, other biopsychosocial factors should also be considered when the grip strength is being interpreted, because other factors such as sex, socioeconomic factors, physical fitness, and comorbidities are negatively associated with grip strength.

Domains rated as important by patients with hand osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

No data exist on patient participation in the selection of core domains for clinical trials of hand osteoarthritis (HOA). We aim to explore HOA patients' perspectives in the relative importance of domains.

METHODS

Seven domains affecting patients' lives were derived from a prior qualitative study. We recruited consecutive patients with symptomatic HOA to rate on 11-point numeric rating scales for each domain, from 0 representing "not important at all" to 10 representing "most important", with consideration in two scenarios: (a) how important the domains are in affecting their current lives; and (b) how important the domains are when there are treatments for HOA (eg exercise or drugs).

RESULTS

Forty-five patients (91% female; mean age ± standard deviation 64.3 ± 7.5 years) with mild HOA symptoms were included. Of these, 31%-42% rated current impact of HOA in various domains as highly important. Seven domains with rated scores of ≥7/10 in importance were endorsed for clinical trials in the following order: pain and HOA symptoms (endorsed by 77.8% of patients), physical function (66.7%), ability to participate in social roles (64.4%), ability to participate in social activities (62.2%), work productivity (62.2%), emotional health (60%), and appearance of fingers (55.6%).

CONCLUSION

The preliminary important domains as endorsed by patients with HOA for inclusion into clinical trials were explored. Apart from pain and physical function, further research is needed to refine other domains of impact, such as participation, emotional health and aesthetic concerns, as core domain sets for HOA.

Risk of hand osteoarthritis in new users of hormone replacement therapy: A nested case-control analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of hand osteoarthritis (HOA) associated with hormone replacement therapy (HRT).

METHODS

We conducted a nested case-control study using data from the UKbased Clinical Practice Research Datalink (1998-2017). In the study inception cohort comprised women at age 45. We matched women with incident HOA during follow-up (cases) to osteoarthritisfree controls on age and calendar date (index date, ID), in a ratio of 1:4. We applied conditional logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) of HOA associated with new HRT use compared with non-use overall, and for women with recorded menopause we calculated separate ORs according to the time between menopause and HRT initiation (current users), and the time between HRT cessation and the ID (past users), versus non-users.

RESULTS

There were 3440 cases and 13,760 controls (mean age: 50.9 ± 4.1 years). We observed an adjusted OR (aOR) of HOA of 1.32 (95 % CI 1.17-1.48) in HRT users (versus nonusers), which attenuated to 0.98 (95 % CI 0.85-1.14) in women with recorded menopause. Current users (versus nonusers) who initiated HRT 3 months before or after menopause had an aOR of 0.72 (95 % CI 0.55-0.96), while aORs increased with later HRT initiation. Among past users (versus non-users), we observed an aOR of 1.25 (95 % CI 0.86-1.81) when HRT use was stopped ≤18 months before the ID, approaching the null with increasing duration between HRT cessation and the ID.

CONCLUSION

Current HRT use was associated with a decreased risk of HOA if initiated around menopause, but the risk reduction disappeared after HRT cessation.

Developing strategic priorities in osteoarthritis research: Proceedings and recommendations arising from the 2017 Australian Osteoarthritis Summit

Background

There is a pressing need to enhance osteoarthritis (OA) research to find ways of alleviating its enormous individual and societal impact due to the high prevalence, associated disability, and extensive costs.

Methods

Potential research priorities and initial rankings were pre-identified via surveys and the 1000Minds process by OA consumers and the research community. The OA Summit was held to decide key research priorities that match the strengths and expertise of the Australian OA research community and align with the needs of consumers. Facilitated breakout sessions were conducted to identify initiatives and strategies to advance OA research into agreed priority areas, and foster collaboration in OA research by forming research networks.

Results

From the pre-Summit activities, the three research priority areas identified were: treatment adherence and behaviour change, disease modification, and prevention of OA. Eighty-five Australian and international leading OA experts participated in the Summit, including specialists, allied health practitioners, researchers from all states of Australia representing both universities and medical research institutes; representatives from Arthritis Australia, health insurers; and persons living with OA. Through the presentations and discussions during the Summit, there was a broad consensus on the OA research priorities across stakeholders and how these can be supported across government, industry, service providers and consumers.

Conclusion

The Australian OA Summit brought consumers, experts and opinion leaders together to identify OA research priorities, to enhance current research efforts by fostering collaboration that offer the greatest potential for alleviating the disease burden.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2455-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Can hybrid hyaluronic acid represent a valid approach to treat rizoarthrosis? A retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) of the trapeziometacarpal joint (TMJ) is a disabling condition with a significant impact on quality of life. The optimal management of hand OA requires a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments that include intra-articular (i.a.) therapy. EULAR experts recommend corticosteroid injections in TMJ OA and underline the usefulness of hyaluronic acid (HA). The aim of this study was the assessment of the efficacy and tolerability of i.a. injections of a hybrid formulation of HA (Sinovial H-L®) in comparison to triamcinolone in patients with TMJ OA.

METHODS

This 6-months observational comparative study, retrospective analyzed the medical records of 100 patients with monolateral or bilateral TMJ OA, treated with two injections of Sinovial H-L® (Sinovial H-L Group) or of triamcinolone acetonide (Triamcinolone Group). Clinical assessments were recorded at the time of the first and second injection and after one, 3 and 6 months. The primary outcomes were the change in global pain on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and in hand function evaluated by the Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) from baseline to month 6. Secondary outcomes were the improvement of the duration of morning stiffness, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36). The comparison between the two groups of treatment were performed with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables and with chi-square or Fisher exact test for categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Both therapies provided effective pain relief and joint function improvement, but the benefits achieved were statistically significantly superior in the Sinovial H-L Group than the Triamcinolone Group after one month (p < 0.01) from the beginning of the therapy and during the 6-months follow-up (p < 0.001). Furthermore, Sinovial H-L® was associated with a significant decrease in the duration of morning stiffness and with a significant improvement in the HAQ score and physical component summary (PCS)-SF-36.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggested that the hybrid formulation of HA may be more effective than triamcinolone in pain relief and joint function improvement with a rapid and persistent effect, resulting a valid alternative to steroid in the management of TMJ OA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, date of registration: June 14, 2017, NCT03200886 . The present trial was retrospectively registered.

The COMET Handbook: version 1.0

The selection of appropriate outcomes is crucial when designing clinical trials in order to compare the effects of different interventions directly. For the findings to influence policy and practice, the outcomes need to be relevant and important to key stakeholders including patients and the public, health care professionals and others making decisions about health care. It is now widely acknowledged that insufficient attention has been paid to the choice of outcomes measured in clinical trials. Researchers are increasingly addressing this issue through the development and use of a core outcome set, an agreed standardised collection of outcomes which should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in all trials for a specific clinical area.Accumulating work in this area has identified the need for guidance on the development, implementation, evaluation and updating of core outcome sets. This Handbook, developed by the COMET Initiative, brings together current thinking and methodological research regarding those issues. We recommend a four-step process to develop a core outcome set. The aim is to update the contents of the Handbook as further research is identified.

An OMERACT Initiative Toward Consensus to Identify and Characterize Candidate Contextual Factors: Report from the Contextual Factors Working Group

Objective.

The importance of contextual factors (CF) for appropriate patient-specific care is widely acknowledged. However, evidence in clinical trials on how CF influence outcomes remains sparse. The 2014 Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Handbook introduced the role of CF in outcome assessment and defined them as “potential confounders and/or effect modifiers of outcomes in randomized controlled trials.” Subsequently, the CF Methods Group (CFMG) was formed to develop guidance on how to address CF in clinical trials.

Methods.

First, the CFMG conducted an e-mail survey of OMERACT working groups (WG) to analyze how they had addressed CF in outcome measurement so far. The results facilitated an informed discussion at the OMERACT 2016 CFMG Special Interest Group (SIG) session, with the aim of gaining preliminary consensus regarding an operational definition of CF and to make a first selection of potentially relevant CF.

Results.

The survey revealed that the WG had mostly used the OMERACT Handbook and/or the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) definition. However, significant heterogeneity was found in the methods used to identify, refine, and categorize CF candidates. The SIG participants agreed on using the ICF as a framework along with the OMERACT Handbook definition. A list with 28 variables was collected including person-related factors and physical and social environments. Recommendations from the SIG guided the CFMG to formulate 3 preliminary projects on how to identify and analyze CF.

Conclusion.

New methods are urgently needed to assist researchers to identify and characterize CF that significantly influence the interpretation of results in clinical trials. The CFMG defined first steps to develop further guidance.

A review of patient and carer participation and the use of qualitative research in the development of core outcome sets

Background

To be meaningful, a core outcome set (COS) should be relevant to all stakeholders including patients and carers. This review aimed to explore the methods by which patients and carers have been included as participants in COS development exercises and, in particular, the use and reporting of qualitative methods.

Methods

In August 2015, a search of the Core Outcomes Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database was undertaken to identify papers involving patients and carers in COS development. Data were extracted to identify the data collection methods used in COS development, the number of health professionals, patients and carers participating in these, and the reported details of qualitative research undertaken.

Results

Fifty-nine papers reporting patient and carer participation were included in the review, ten of which reported using qualitative methods. Although patients and carers participated in outcome elicitation for inclusion in COS processes, health professionals tended to dominate the prioritisation exercises. Of the ten qualitative papers, only three were reported as a clear pre-designed part of a COS process. Qualitative data were collected using interviews, focus groups or a combination of these. None of the qualitative papers reported an underpinning methodological framework and details regarding data saturation, reflexivity and resource use associated with data collection were often poorly reported. Five papers reported difficulty in achieving a diverse sample of participants and two reported that a large and varied range of outcomes were often identified by participants making subsequent rating and ranking difficult.

Conclusions

Consideration of the best way to include patients and carers throughout the COS development process is needed. Additionally, further work is required to assess the potential role of qualitative methods in COS, to explore the knowledge produced by different qualitative data collection methods, and to evaluate the time and resources required to incorporate qualitative methods into COS development.

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging to detect cartilage loss in severe osteoarthritis of the first carpometacarpal joint: comparison with histological evaluation

Background

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used for research in hand osteoarthritis, but imaging the thin cartilage layers in the hand joints remains challenging. We therefore assessed the accuracy of MRI in detecting cartilage loss in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the first carpometacarpal (CMC1) joint.

Methods

Twelve patients scheduled for trapeziectomy to treat severe symptomatic osteoarthritis of the CMC1 joint underwent a preoperative high resolution 3D spoiled gradient (SPGR) MRI scan. Subsequently, the resected trapezium was evaluated histologically. The sections were scored for cartilage damage severity (Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) score), and extent of damage (percentage surface area). Each MRI scan was scored for the area of normal cartilage, partial cartilage loss and full cartilage loss. The percentages of the total surface area with any cartilage loss and full-thickness cartilage loss were calculated using MRI and histological evaluation.

Results

MRI and histological evaluation both identified large areas of overall cartilage loss. The median (IQR) surface area of any cartilage loss on MRI was 98% (82–100%), and on histological assessment 96% (87–98%). However, MRI underestimated the extent of full-thickness cartilage loss. The median (IQR) surface area of full-thickness cartilage loss on MRI was 43% (22–70%), and on histological evaluation 79% (67–85%). The difference was caused by a thin layer of high signal on the articulating surface, which was interpreted as damaged cartilage on MRI but which was not identified on histological evaluation.

Conclusions

Three-dimensional SPGR MRI of the CMC1 joint demonstrates overall cartilage damage, but underestimates full-thickness cartilage loss in patients with advanced osteoarthritis.

Hand-related physical function in rheumatic hand conditions: a protocol for developing a patient-reported outcome measurement instrument

INTRODUCTION

There is no consensus about what constitutes the most appropriate patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) instrument for measuring physical function in patients with rheumatic hand conditions. Existing instruments lack psychometric testing and vary in feasibility and their psychometric qualities. We aim to develop a PROM instrument to assess hand-related physical function in rheumatic hand conditions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a systematic search to identify existing PROMs to rheumatic hand conditions, and select items relevant for hand-related physical function as well as those items from the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) item bank that are relevant to patients with rheumatic hand conditions. Selection will be based on consensus among reviewers. Content validity of selected items will be established through the use of focus groups. If patients deem necessary, we will develop new items based on the patients' input. We will examine whether it is valid to score all selected and developed items on the same scale as the original items from the PROMIS PF item bank. Our analyses will follow the methods used for calibrating the original PROMIS PF item bank in US samples, which were largely based on the general PROMIS approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be carried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration. Ethics approvals will be obtained where necessary, and signed informed consent will be obtained from all participants. We aim to disseminate the results of the study through publication in international peer-reviewed journals and at international conferences.

Does occupational therapy reduce the need for surgery in carpometacarpal osteoarthritis? Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In the absence of disease-modifying interventions for hand osteoarthritis (OA), occupational therapy (OT) comprising patient education, hand exercises, assistive devices and orthoses are considered as core treatments, whereas surgery are recommended for those with severe carpometacarpal (CMC1) OA. However, even though CMC1 surgery may reduce pain and improve function, the risk of adverse effects is high, and randomized controlled trials comparing surgery with non-surgical interventions are warranted. This multicentre randomized controlled trial aims to address the following questions: Does OT in the period before surgical consultation reduce the need for surgery in CMC1-OA? What are patients' motivation and reasons for wanting CMC1-surgery? Are there differences between departments of rheumatology concerning the degree of CMC1-OA, pain and functional limitations in patients who are referred for surgical consultation for CMC1 surgery? Is the Measure of Activity Performance of the Hand a reliable measure in patients with CMC1-OA? Do patients with CMC1-OA with and without affection of the distal and proximal interphalangeal finger joints differ with regard to symptoms and function? Do the degree of CMC1-OA, symptoms and functional limitations significantly predict improvement after 2 years following OT or CMC1-surgery? Is OT more cost-effective than surgery in the management of CMC1-OA?

METHODS/DESIGN

All persons referred for surgical consultation due to their CMC1-OA at one of three Norwegian departments of rheumatology are invited to participate. Those who agree attend a clinical assessment and report their symptoms, function and motivation for surgery in validated outcome measures, before they are randomly selected to receive OT in the period before surgical consultation (estimated n = 180). The primary outcome will be the number of participants in each group who have received surgical treatment after 2 years. Secondary and tertiary outcomes are pain, function and satisfaction with care over the 2-year trial period. Outcomes will be collected at baseline, 4, 18 and 24 months. The main analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis, using logistic regression, comparing the number of participants in each group who have received surgical treatment after 2 years.

DISCUSSION

The findings will improve the evidence-based management of HOA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER

NCT01794754 . First registrated February 15^th 2013.

Sensitivity-to-change and validity of semi-automatic joint space width measurements in hand osteoarthritis: a follow-up study

OBJECTIVE

To assess sensitivity-to-change and validity of longitudinal quantitative semi-automatic joint space width (JSW) measurements and to compare this method with semi-quantitative joint space narrowing (JSN) scoring in hand osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

DESIGN

Baseline and 2-year follow-up radiographs of 56 hand OA patients (mean age 62 years, 86% women) were used. JSN was scored 0-3 using the Osteoarthritis Research Society International atlas and JSW was quantified in millimetres (mm) in the second to fifth distal, proximal interphalangeal and metacarpal joints (DIPJs, PIPJs, MCPJs). Sensitivity-to-change was evaluated by calculating Standardized Response Means (SRMs). Change in JSW or JSN above the Smallest Detectable Difference (SDD) defined progression on joint level. To assess construct validity, progressed joints were compared by cross-tabulation and by associating baseline ultrasound variables with progression (using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for age and sex).

RESULTS

The JSW method detected statistically significant mean changes over 2.6 years (-0.027 mm (95%CI -0.01; -0.04), -0.024 mm (-0.01; -0.03), -0.021 mm (-0.01; -0.03) for DIPJs, PIPJs, MCPJs, respectively). Sensitivity-to-change was low (SRMs: 0.174, 0.168, 0.211, respectively). 9.1% (121/1336) of joints progressed in JSW, but 3.6% (48/1336) widened. 83 (6.2%) joints progressed in JSW only, 36 (2.7%) in JSN only and 37 (2.8%) in both methods. Progression in JSW showed weaker associations with baseline inflammatory ultrasound features than progression in JSN.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of progression in hand OA defined by JSW measurements is possible, but performs less well than progression defined by JSN scoring. Therefore, the value of JSW measurements in hand OA clinical trials remains questionable.

Instruments Measuring Pain, Physical Function, or Patient’s Global Assessment in Hand Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Literature Search

Objective.

Description of use and metric properties of instruments measuring pain, physical function, or patient’s global assessment (PtGA) in hand osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods.

Medical literature databases up to January 2014 were systematically reviewed for studies reporting on instruments measuring pain, physical function, or PtGA in hand OA. The frequency of the use of these instruments were described, as well as their metric properties, including discrimination (reliability, sensitivity to change), feasibility, and validity.

Results.

In 66 included studies, various questionnaires and performance- or assessor-based instruments were applied for evaluation of pain, physical function, or PtGA. No major differences regarding metric properties were observed between the instruments, although the amount of supporting evidence varied. The most frequently evaluated questionnaires were the Australian/Canadian Hand OA Index (AUSCAN) pain subscale and visual analog scale (VAS) pain for pain assessment, and the AUSCAN function subscale and Functional Index for Hand OA (FIHOA) for physical function assessment. Excellent reliability was shown for the AUSCAN and FIHOA, and good sensitivity to change for all mentioned instruments; additionally, the FIHOA had good feasibility. Good construct validity was suggested for all mentioned questionnaires. The most commonly applied performance- or assessor-based instruments were the grip and pinch strength for the assessment of physical function, and the assessment of pain by palpation. For these measures, good sensitivity to change and construct validity were established.

Conclusion.

The AUSCAN, FIHOA, VAS pain, grip and pinch strength, and pain on palpation were most frequently used and provided most supporting evidence for good metric properties. More research has to be performed to compare the different instruments with each other.

Patient-reported outcomes in core domain sets for rheumatic diseases

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are abundant in rheumatology and their numbers continue to increase. But which of the available measures are most important? Core outcome sets-including groups of domains and instruments for measuring them-have been defined for many rheumatic diseases, with the aim that all these outcomes should be measured in every clinical trial. The subgroup of PROs included in these core sets is, therefore, undoubtedly important. This Review summarizes the PROs included in core outcome sets developed for use in clinical trials across a wide range of rheumatic diseases. Three PROs are commonly utilized across the majority of rheumatic conditions: pain, physical functioning and the patient global assessment of disease activity. However, additional research is needed to fully understand the role of the patient global assessment of disease activity, to distinguish specific domains within the broad concept of health-related quality of life, and to work towards consensus on the choice between generic and disease-specific instruments in various contexts.

Report from the OMERACT Hand Osteoarthritis Working Group: Set of Core Domains and Preliminary Set of Instruments for Use in Clinical Trials and Observational Studies

Objective.

During OMERACT 12, a workshop was held with the aim to endorse a core set of domains for 3 settings: clinical trials of symptom and structure modification and observational studies. Additional goals were to endorse a core set of contextual factors for these settings, and to define preliminary instruments for each core domain. Finally, an agenda for future research in hand osteoarthritis (OA) was to be proposed.

Methods.

Literature reviews of preliminary instruments for each core domain of the proposed core set for hand OA in the settings described above. Literature review of radiographic scoring methods and modern imaging in hand OA were also performed. Proposed contextual factors for a core set were identified through 2 Delphi exercises with participation of hand OA experts, patient partners, and OMERACT participants.

Results.

Results from Delphi exercises and systematic literature reviews were presented and discussed. It was agreed that a preliminary core domain set for the setting clinical trials of symptom modification should contain at least “pain, physical function, patient global assessment, joint activity and hand strength.” The settings clinical trial of structure modification and observational studies would in addition include structural damage. Preliminary instruments for the proposed domains were agreed on. A list of prioritized contextual factors was defined and endorsed for further research. A research agenda was proposed for domain instrument validation according to the OMERACT Filter 2.0.

Conclusion.

Preliminary core sets for clinical trials of symptom and structure modification and observational studies in hand osteoarthritis, including preliminary instruments and contextual factors, were agreed upon during OMERACT 12.

OARSI Clinical Trials Recommendations: Design and conduct of clinical trials for hand osteoarthritis

Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is a very frequent disease, but yet understudied. However, a lot of works have been published in the past 10 years, and much has been done to better understand its clinical course and structural progression. Despite this new knowledge, few therapeutic trials have been conducted in hand OA. The last OARSI recommendations for the conduct of clinical trials in hand OA dates back to 2006. The present recommendations aimed at updating previous recommendations, by incorporating new data. The purpose of this expert opinion, consensus driven exercise is to provide evidence-based guidance on the design, execution and analysis of clinical trials in hand OA, where published evidence is available, supplemented by expert opinion, where evidence is lacking, to perform clinical trials in hand OA, both for symptom and for structure-modification. They indicate core outcome measurement sets for studies in hand OA, and list the methods and instruments that should be used to measure symptoms or structure. For both symptom- and structure-modification, at least pain, physical function, patient global assessment, HR-QoL, joint activity and hand strength should be assessed. In addition, for structure-modification trials, structural progression should be measured by radiographic changes. We also provide a research agenda listing many unsolved issues that seem to most urgently need to be addressed from the perspective of performing "good" clinical trials in hand OA. These updated OARSI recommendations should allow for better standardizing the conduct of clinical trials in hand OA in the next future.