Experiences and care needs of children with long COVID: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Long COVID, the patient-preferred term, describes symptoms persisting after an acute episode of COVID-19 infection. Symptoms in children and young people (CYP) can affect daily routine, with broader impacts on education, health-related quality of life, and social activities, which may have long-term effects on health and wellbeing.

AIM

To explore the lived experiences and care needs of CYP with long COVID from the perspectives of CYP with long COVID, their parents, and professionals associated with the care of children and families living with the condition.

DESIGN & SETTING

CYP and their parent or carer were invited for interview following participation in a cohort study, which recruited the sample from a primary care setting.

METHOD

Interviews were carried out with four CYP with long COVID (all female, aged 10-17 years); three interviews included a parent. Two focus groups were conducted, which included seven professionals involved with care of CYP or long COVID, from a range of disciplines. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim, and data analysed thematically using constant comparison techniques.

RESULTS

The three main themes presented are as follows: living with long COVID; uncertainty surrounding long COVID; and seeking help for symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Long COVID can severely impact the lives of CYP and their families. CYP and their families need to be listened to by professionals and have any uncertainties acknowledged. It is imperative that agencies working with them understand the condition and its impact, and are able to offer support where needed.

The relationship between pain and depression and anxiety in patients with inflammatory arthritis: a systematic review protocol

Pain is a major challenge for patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA). Depression and anxiety are common comorbidities in IA, associating with worse outcomes. How they relate to pain is uncertain, with existing systematic reviews (a) mainly considering cross-sectional studies, (b) focusing on the relationship between pain and mental health in the context of disease activity/quality of life, and (c) not specifically considering the impact of treating depression/anxiety on pain. This PROSPERO-registered (CRD42023411823) systematic review will address this knowledge-gap by synthesizing evidence to summarise the associations (and potential mediators) between pain and depression/anxiety and evaluate the impact of treating co-morbid depression/anxiety on pain in IA. Relevant databases will be searched, articles screened and their quality appraised (using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools) by two reviewers. Eligible studies will include adults with rheumatoid arthritis or spondyloarthritis, be a clinical trial or observational study, and either (a) report the relationship between pain and depression/anxiety (observational studies/baseline trials), or (b) randomise participants to a pharmacological or psychological treatment to manage depression/anxiety with a pain outcome as an endpoint (trials). To synthesise data on the association between pain and depression/anxiety, where available adjusted coefficients from regression models will be pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. A synthesis without meta-analysis will summarise mediators. To evaluate the impact of treating depression/anxiety on pain, endpoint mean differences between treatment arms will be combined in a random-effects meta-analysis. Through understanding how depression/anxiety contribute to pain in IA, our review has the potential to help optimise approaches to IA pain.

Treatment of polymyalgia rheumatica: British Society for Rheumatology guideline scope

The last British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) guideline on PMR was published in 2009. The guideline needs to be updated to provide a summary of the current evidence for pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of adults with PMR. This guideline is aimed at healthcare professionals in the UK who directly care for people with PMR, including general practitioners, rheumatologists, nurses, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, pharmacists, psychologists and other health professionals. It will also be relevant to people living with PMR and organisations that support them in the public and third sector, including charities and informal patient support groups. This guideline will be developed using the methods and processes outlined in the BSR Guidelines Protocol. Here we provide a brief summary of the scope of the guideline update in development.

Analgesic prescribing in patients with inflammatory arthritis in England: observational studies in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

OBJECTIVES

Despite little evidence that analgesics are effective in inflammatory arthritis (IA), studies report substantial opioid prescribing. The extent this applies to other analgesics is uncertain. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of analgesic prescribing in patients with IA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum to evaluate this.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2020, cross-sectional analyses evaluated analgesic prescription annual prevalence in RA, PsA and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and geography. Joinpoint regression evaluated temporal prescribing trends. Cohort studies determined prognostic factors at diagnosis for chronic analgesic prescriptions using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Analgesic prescribing declined over time but remained common: 2004 and 2020 IA prescription prevalence was 84.2/100 person-years (PY) (95% CI 83.9, 84.5) and 64.5/100 PY (64.2, 64.8), respectively. In 2004, NSAIDs were most prescribed (56.1/100 PY; 55.8, 56.5), falling over time. Opioids were most prescribed in 2020 (39.0/100 PY; 38.7, 39.2). Gabapentinoid prescribing increased: 2004 prevalence 1.1/100 PY (1.0, 1.2); 2020 prevalence 9.9/100 PY (9.7, 10.0). Most opioid prescriptions were chronic (2020 prevalence 23.4/100 PY [23.2, 23.6]). Non-NSAID analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA, older people, females and deprived areas/northern England. Conversely, NSAID prescribing was commoner in axSpA/males, varying little by deprivation/geography. Peri-diagnosis was high-risk for starting chronic opioid/NSAID prescriptions. Prognostic factors for chronic opioid/gabapentinoid and NSAID prescriptions differed, with NSAIDs having no consistently significant association with deprivation (unlike opioids/gabapentinoids).

CONCLUSION

IA analgesic prescribing of all classes is widespread. This is neither evidence-based nor in line with guidelines. Peri-diagnosis is an opportune moment to reduce chronic analgesic prescribing.

Test-retest reliability of pain VAS/NRS, stiffness VAS/NRS, HAQ-DI and mHAQ in polymyalgia rheumatica: An OMERACT study

OBJECTIVE

To examine the test-retest reliability of four measurement instruments in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR): pain severity visual analogue scale (VAS) / numerical rating score (NRS), stiffness severity VAS/NRS, the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ).

METHOD

Two prospectively collected datasets were used. All participants had a diagnosis of PMR and only those with stable disease were included in analyses. Measurement instruments were administered twice, with a testing interval of two to six weeks. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated using a two-way mixed effects model looking for absolute agreement. ICC values of 0.8-0.9 were deemed representative of good test-retest reliability, whilst values >0.9 were representative of excellent test-retest reliability.

RESULTS

From the first dataset, 38 participants were analysed. The ICC between baseline and 2 weeks for pain VAS, stiffness VAS, HAQ-DI and mHAQ were 0.84, 0.82, 0.92 and 0.92 respectively. From the second dataset, 58 participants were included in the analysis for pain NRS, 59 for stiffness NRS and 78 for mHAQ. The ICC between baseline and follow-up for pain NRS, stiffness NRS and mHAQ were 0.80, 0.83 and 0.87 respectively.

CONCLUSION

Pain severity VAS/NRS, stiffness severity VAS/NRS, HAQ-DI and mHAQ all demonstrate good to excellent test-retest reliability in a PMR patient population.

Applying the consolidated framework for implementation research to evaluate the community rapid intervention service

BACKGROUND

Developed in 2019, the Community Rapid Intervention Service (CRIS) is a community intervention service aiming to prevent hospital admissions. CRIS provides a response within two hours to patients with sub-acute medical needs in their usual place of residence. This evaluation aimed to identify challenges and facilitators to implementation of the service, with a view to informing future service development, optimising patient care and disseminating learning to other areas looking to implement similar services.

METHODS

This study used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) as an evaluation framework. We conducted semi-structured interviews with local healthcare system leaders, clinicians that worked within the CRIS, and clinicians who interfaced with the CRIS. The CFIR was used to guide data collection and analysis. Two Community of Practice (CoP) meetings were held to gather stakeholders' perspectives of the evaluation.

RESULTS

Three key themes were identified from the analysis of 13 interviews: contextual factors influencing implementation, service identity and navigating complexity. Contextual factors such the influence of the Covid 19 pandemic upon health services and the expansion of the CRIS were discussed by participants. The adaptability of the service was deemed both a facilitator and challenge of implementation. Ways to build-on and improve the existing CRIS model were suggested.

CONCLUSION

This evaluation has shown that the CRIS may need to be redefined with clarity provided as to how the service interfaces with other urgent and planned care offered in acute, primary, community and social services. Structuring the evaluation around the CFIR was helpful in identifying facilitators and challenges that influenced the implementation of the CRIS.

Development and psychometric evaluation of the PMR-Impact Scale: a new patient reported outcome measure for polymyalgia rheumatica

OBJECTIVES

PMR causes pain, stiffness and disability in older adults. Measuring the impact of the condition from the patient's perspective is vital to high-quality research and patient-centred care, yet there are no validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for PMR. We set out to develop and psychometrically evaluate a PMR-specific PROM.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional postal surveys of people with a confirmed diagnosis of PMR were used to provide data for field testing and psychometric evaluation. A total of 256 participants completed the draft PROM. Distribution of item responses was examined, and exploratory factor analysis and Rasch analysis were used to inform item reduction, formation of dimension structure and scoring system development. Some 179 participants completed the PROM at two time points, along with comparator questionnaires and anchor questions. Test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness were evaluated.

RESULTS

Results from the field-testing study led to the formation of the PMR-Impact Scale (PMR-IS), comprising four domains (symptoms, function, psychological and emotional well-being, and steroid side effects). Construct validity and test-retest reliability met accepted quality criteria for each domain. There was insufficient evidence from this study to determine its ability to detect flares/deterioration, but the PMR-IS was responsive to improvements in the condition.

CONCLUSION

The PMR-IS offers researchers a new way to assess patient-reported outcomes in clinical studies of PMR. It has been developed robustly, with patient input at every stage. It has good construct validity and test-retest reliability. Further work is needed to fully establish its responsiveness and interpretability parameters, and to assess its real-world clinical utility.

Rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis epidemiology in England from 2004 to 2020: An observational study using primary care electronic health record data

BACKGROUND

Contemporary data on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritits (SpA) epidemiology in England are lacking. This knowledge is crucial to planning healthcare services. We updated algorithms defining patients with diagnoses of RA, PsA, and axial SpA in primary care and applied them to describe their incidence and prevalence in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum, an electronic health record (EHR) database covering ∼20% of England.

METHODS

Algorithms for ascertaining patients with RA, axial SpA, and PsA diagnoses validated in primary care EHR databases using Read codes were updated (to account for the English NHS change to SNOMED CT diagnosis coding) and applied. Updated diagnosis and synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug code lists were devised by rheumatologists and general practitioners. Annual incidence/point-prevalence of RA, PsA, and axial SpA diagnoses were calculated from 2004 to 2020 and stratified by age/sex.

FINDINGS

Point-prevalence of RA/PsA diagnoses increased annually, peaking in 2019 (RA 0·779% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·773, 0·784]; PsA 0·287% [95% CI 0·284, 0·291]) then falling slightly. Point-prevalence of axial SpA diagnoses increased annually (except in 2018/2019), peaking in 2020 (0·113% [95% CI 0·111, 0·115]). RA diagnosis annual incidence was higher between 2013-2019 (after inclusion in the Quality and Outcomes Framework, range 49·1 [95% CI 47·7, 50·5] to 52·1 [95% CI 50·6, 53·6]/100,000 person-years) than 2004-2012 (range 34·5 [95% CI 33·2, 35·7] to 40·0 [95% CI 38·6, 41·4]/100,000 person-years). Increases in the annual incidence of PsA/axial SpA diagnosis occurred following new classification criteria publication. Annual incidence of RA, PsA and axial SpA diagnoses fell by 40·1%, 67·4%, and 38·1%, respectively between 2019 and 2020, likely reflecting the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on their diagnosis.

INTERPRETATION

Recorded RA, PsA, and axial SpA diagnoses are increasingly prevalent in England, underlining the importance of organising healthcare services to provide timely, treat-to-target care to optimise the health of >1% of adults in England.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR300826).

P183 Establishing the epidemiology of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and axial spondyloarthritis in England using primary care electronic health record data

Background/Aims

The substantial personal and socioeconomic costs associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) make understanding their epidemiology crucial. The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (Aurum) is an electronic healthcare record (EHR) database, containing primary care records from ∼20% of English practices (>13 million patients currently registered). To determine RA/PsA/axial SpA epidemiology using EHR data, validated methods need to be applied to ascertain patients with these diagnoses. To address this, we updated and applied approaches validated in other primary care EHR databases in Aurum and described the annual incidence/point-prevalence of RA/PsA/axial SpA alongside patient characteristics (providing indirect evidence of coding accuracy).

Methods

Diagnosis and synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) prescription code lists were constructed, and pre-defined approaches for ascertaining patients with RA/axial SpA/PsA applied. The annual incidence and point-prevalence of RA/PsA/axial SpA were calculated from 2004-2020. Samples were stratified by age/gender, and mean age and gender/ethnic-group relative frequencies described. The study was approved by the CPRD Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (reference 20_000244).

Results

From 2004-2019 the point-prevalence of RA/PsA increased annually, peaking in 2019 (RA 7.79/1,000; PsA 2.87/1,000) then falling slightly. From 2004-2020 the point-prevalence of axial SpA increased annually (except in 2018/2019), peaking in 2020 (1.13/1,000). Annual RA incidence was higher between 2013-2019 (when included in the Quality Outcomes Framework, ranging 0.491 to 0.521/1,000 person-years) than 2004-2012 (ranging 0.345 to 0.400/1,000 person-years). The annual incidence of PsA and axial SpA increased from 2006 (0.108 to a peak of 0.172/1,000 person-years) and 2010 (0.025 to a peak of 0.045/1,000 person-years), respectively. These years were when new disease classification criteria were introduced. Marked falls in the annual incidence of RA, PsA and axial SpA between 2019 and 2020 were seen, reducing by 40.1%, 67.4% and 38.1%, respectively, reflecting the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on arthritis diagnoses. Stratifying incidence/prevalence by age/gender broadly showed expected patterns (although the incidence of axial SpA/PsA in women increased over time), and the mean age and gender proportions followed those previously reported.

Conclusion

The approaches we used to determine patients with RA, PsA, and axial SpA in Aurum led to incidence/prevalence estimates broadly consistent with published studies, and patient characteristics as would be expected. These data support the potential of the Aurum-updated ascertainment approaches for use in further studies of RA, PsA and axial SpA.

Disclosure

I. Scott: None. R. Whittle: None. J. Bailey: None. H. Twohig: None. S. Hider: None. C. Mallen: None. S. Muller: None. K. Jordan: None.

Primary care for people with severe mental illness and comorbid obstructive airways disease: a qualitative study of patient perspectives with integrated stakeholder feedback

OBJECTIVES

To explore patient and stakeholder perspectives on primary respiratory care for people with severe mental illness (SMI) and comorbid obstructive airways disease (OAD).

DESIGN

Qualitative, semistructured qualitative interviews were undertaken with a purposive sample of people with a diagnosis of SMI (bipolar illness, schizophrenia, affective disorder with psychosis) and comorbid asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Transcribed data were analysed using an interpretive phenomenological approach. Study results were discussed with stakeholders.

SETTING

Eight UK general practices.

PARTICIPANTS

16 people aged 45-75 years, with SMI and comorbid asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were interviewed. Twenty-one people, four with lived experience of SMI and seventeen health/social care/third sector practitioners, participated in discussion groups at a stakeholder event.

RESULTS

Participants described disability and isolation arising from the interplay of SMI and OAD symptoms. Social support determined ease of access to primary care. Self-management of respiratory health was not person-centred as practitioners failed to consider individual needs and health literacy. Participants perceived smoking cessation impossible without tailored support. Less than half of the practices facilitated personalised access to timely primary care and continuity. Overall, there was a reliance on urgent care if service adaptations and social support were lacking. The stakeholder group expressed concern about gaps in care, the short-term funding of community organisations and fear of loss of benefits. Potential solutions focused on supported navigation of care pathways, relational continuity, individual and community asset building and the evolving social prescriber role.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that despite UK guidelines and incentives to optimise physical healthcare, primary care fails to consistently deliver integrated biopsychosocial care for patients with SMI and OAD. Collaborative, personalised care that builds social capital and tailors support for self-management is needed, alongside service-level interventions to enhance access to healthcare for patients with comorbid SMI and OAD.

Feasibility and Face Validity of Outcome Measures for Use in Future Studies of Polymyalgia Rheumatica: An OMERACT Study

OBJECTIVE

To survey participants with polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) to evaluate the face validity, acceptability, and domain match of proposed candidate outcome measures.

METHODS

A structured, online, anonymous survey was disseminated by patient support groups through their networks and online forums. The candidate outcome measures comprised (1) visual analog scale (VAS) and numerical rating score (NRS) to assess pain; (2) VAS, NRS, and duration to assess stiffness; (3) the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index to assess physical function; and (4) C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate to assess inflammation. Free-text answers were analyzed using descriptive thematic analysis to determine respondents' views of the candidate instruments.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight people with PMR from 6 countries (UK, France, USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) participated in the survey. Most respondents agreed candidate instruments were acceptable or "good to go." Free-text analysis identified 5 themes that participants considered inadequately covered by the proposed instruments. These related to (1) the variability, context, and location of pain; (2) the variability of stiffness; (3) fatigue; (4) disability; and (5) the correlation of inflammatory marker levels and severity of symptoms, sometimes reflecting disease activity and other times not.

CONCLUSION

Participants reported additional aspects of their experience that are not covered by the proposed instruments, particularly for the experience of stiffness and effect of fatigue. New patient-reported outcome measures are required to increase the relevance of results from clinical trials to patients with PMR.

Outcomes Measured in Polymyalgia Rheumatica and Measurement Properties of Instruments Considered for the OMERACT Core Outcome Set: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically identify the outcome measures and instruments used in clinical studies of polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and to evaluate evidence about their measurement properties.

METHODS

Searches based on the MeSH term "polymyalgia rheumatica" were carried out in 5 databases. Two researchers were involved in screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. Once outcomes and instruments used were identified and categorized, key instruments were selected for further review through a consensus process. Studies on measurement properties of these instruments were appraised against the COSMIN-OMERACT (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology) checklist to determine the extent of evidence supporting their use in PMR.

RESULTS

Forty-six studies were included. In decreasing order of frequency, the most common outcomes (and instruments) used were markers of systemic inflammation [erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP)], pain [visual analog scale (VAS)], stiffness (duration in minutes), and physical function (elevation of upper limbs). Instruments selected for further evaluation were ESR, CRP, pain VAS, morning stiffness duration, and the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Five studies evaluated measurement properties of these instruments, but none met all of the COSMIN-OMERACT checklist criteria.

CONCLUSION

Measurement of outcomes in studies of PMR lacks consistency. The critical patient-centered domain of physical function is poorly assessed. None of the candidate instruments considered for inclusion in the core outcome set had high-quality evidence, derived from populations with PMR, on their full range of measurement properties. Further studies are needed to determine whether these instruments are suitable for inclusion in a core outcome measurement set for PMR.

Toward a Core Outcome Measurement Set for Polymyalgia Rheumatica: Report from the OMERACT 2018 Special Interest Group

Objective.

To report the progress of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Polymyalgia Rheumatica (PMR) Working Group in selecting candidate instruments for a core outcome measurement set.

Methods.

A systematic literature review identified outcomes measured and instruments used in PMR studies, and a respondent survey and raw data analysis assessed their domain match and feasibility.

Results.

Candidate instruments were identified for pain [visual analog scale/numerical rating scale (VAS/NRS)], stiffness (VAS/NRS and duration), and physical function (Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index/modified Health Assessment Questionnaire). Domain match and feasibility assessments were favorable; however, validation in PMR was lacking.

Conclusion.

Further assessment of candidate instruments is required prior to recommending a PMR core outcome measurement set.

The OMERACT Core Domain Set for Outcome Measures for Clinical Trials in Polymyalgia Rheumatica

OBJECTIVE

To inform development of a core domain set for outcome measures for clinical trials in polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), we conducted patient consultations, a systematic review, a Delphi study, and 2 qualitative studies.

METHODS

Domains identified by 70% or more of physicians and/or patients in the Delphi study were selected. The conceptual framework derived from the 2 qualitative research studies helped inform the meaning of each domain and its relationship to the others. The draft core domain set was refined by further discussion with patients and physicians who had participated in the Delphi study. At the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 2016, the domains were discussed and prioritized by 8 breakout groups. Formal voting took place at the end of the workshop and in the final plenary.

RESULTS

Ninety-three percent of voters in the final plenary agreed that the inner core of domains considered mandatory for clinical trials of PMR should consist the following: laboratory markers of systemic inflammation, pain, stiffness, and physical function. Patient's global and fatigue were considered important but not mandatory (outer core). The research agenda included psychological impact, weakness, physical activity, participation, sleep, imaging, and health-related quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This core domain set was considered sufficiently well-defined that the next step will be to apply the OMERACT Filter 2.0 Instrument Selection Algorithm to select candidate instruments for a subsequent "deeper dive" into the data. This will allow instruments to be mapped onto each of our core domains to derive a core outcome set for PMR.

Assessment of the face validity, feasibility and utility of a patient-completed questionnaire for polymyalgia rheumatica: a postal survey using the QQ-10 questionnaire

Background

The development of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR), a condition that causes pain, stiffness and disability, is necessary as there is no current validated disease-specific measure. Initial literature synthesis and qualitative research established a conceptual framework for the condition along with a list of symptoms and effects of PMR that patients felt were important to them. These findings were used to derive the candidate items for a patient-completed questionnaire. We aim to establish the face validity of this initial “long form” of a PROM.

Methods

People with a current or previous diagnosis of PMR were recruited both from the community and from rheumatology clinics. They were asked to complete the PMR questionnaire along with the QQ-10 questionnaire, which is a measure used to assess the face validity, feasibility and utility of patient healthcare questionnaires.

Results

A total of 28 participants with an age range of 59–85 years and a length of time since diagnosis from 4 months to 18 years completed the QQ-10. The overall mean “value” score was 79% (SD 12), and the mean “burden” score was 21% (SD 18). The free-text comments were analysed thematically and were found to focus on layout, content, where in the clinical pathway the questionnaire would be most beneficial, specific items missing and other areas for consideration.

Conclusions

The high mean value score and low burden score indicate that the questionnaire has good face validity and is acceptable to patients. The questionnaire now needs to undergo further psychometric evaluation and refinement to develop the final tool for use in clinical practice and research.

"I suddenly felt I'd aged": a qualitative study of patient experiences of polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR)

OBJECTIVES

To explore patient experiences of living with, and receiving treatment for, PMR.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews, with 22 patients with PMR recruited from general practices in South Yorkshire. Thematic analysis using a constant comparative method, ran concurrently with the interviews and was used to derive a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

5 Key themes emerged highlighting the importance of: (1) pain, stiffness and weakness, (2) disability, (3) treatment and disease course, (4) experience of care, (5) psychological impact of PMR. Patients emphasised the profound disability experienced that was often associated with fear and vulnerability, highlighting how this was often not recognised by health care professionals. Patients' experiences also challenge medical convention, particularly around the concept of 'weakness' as a symptom, the use of morning stiffness as a measure of disease activity and the myth of full resolution of symptoms with steroid treatment. Treatment decisions were complex, with patients balancing glucocorticoid side effects against persistent symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients often described their experience of PMR in terms of disability rather than focussing on localised symptoms. The associated psychological impact was significant.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Recognising this is key to achieving shared understanding, reaching the correct diagnosis promptly, and formulating a patient-centred management plan.