Navigating the path of progress: The OMERACT 2023 emerging leaders program

OBJECTIVES

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) Emerging Leaders Program (ELP) aims to cultivate a cohort of skilled leaders within the OMERACT community empowering them with expertise and knowledge to help shape and steer the organization into the future. This publication highlights the significance of the ELP in driving leadership excellence, its impact on OMERACT's evolution, and the outcomes and learnings from the OMERACT 2023 ELP.

METHODS

Insights from the 2018 ELP report informed 2023 program improvements. Engagement was measured by attendance and WhatsApp interactions. Positive program aspects, areas for improvement and ideas for enhancing future ELPs were captured via anonymous survey and participant focus groups.

RESULTS

Engagement with the ELP was high with 9 participants, 96 % attendance at all workshops, 154 WhatsApp interactions. All program components were highly rated, with the highest being the 'Psychological Safety' and 'Methodology/Process/Politics' workshops. Future enhancements included creating further networking, connection and support activities, practical leadership and methodological skill development opportunities, and a new stream focussing on organisational advancement.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2023 OMERACT ELP was well received and successfully addressed areas previously identified as requiring improvement. New educational enhancements were valued, and the importance of fostering psychological safety at all levels was highlighted. The ELP fortifies OMERACT by nurturing a diverse array of skilled leaders who embody OMERACTs core values. Continuing to refine and evolve the ELP over time will help OMERACT sustain its global influence in patient-centered outcome research.

Assessment of complementary health approaches use in pediatric oncology: Modification and preliminary validation of the "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) questionnaires

OBJECTIVE

Complementary Health Approaches (CHA) are commonly used by children with cancer; however, a few health care providers (HCPs) inquire about the use of CHA. A standardized questionnaire could facilitate such clinical discussions. We aimed to adapt and determine the face and content validity of the "Which Health Approaches and Treatments are you using?" (WHAT) child and parent-report questionnaires in pediatric oncology.

METHODS

An electronic Delphi survey that included children with cancer (8-18 years), parents, and HCPs and CHA researchers was conducted to reach consensus on the content of the WHAT questionnaires in pediatric oncology. Children and parents from the Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), and HCPs and researchers from the International Society of Pediatric Oncology and Pediatric Complementary and Alternative Medicine Research and Education Network completed the survey. To determine the face and content validity of the questionnaires, two iterative cycles of individual interviews were conducted with purposive samples of children (8-18 years), parents, and HCPs from SickKids.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on all domains and items of the original WHAT questionnaires after one Delphi cycle (n = 61). For face and content validity testing, the first cycle of interviews (n = 19) revealed that the questionnaires were mostly comprehensive and relevant. However, the paper-based format of the original WHAT was not user-friendly, and generic items were vague and not aimed at facilitating clinical dialogues about CHA use. The WHAT questionnaires were then modified into electronic cancer-specific self- and proxy-report questionnaires including 13 and 15 items, respectively. The second cycle (n = 21) showed no need for further changes.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified electronic cancer-specific WHAT questionnaires showed adequate face and content validity. The next step is to determine inter-rater reliability, construct validity, and feasibility of administration of the modified WHAT questionnaires in pediatric oncology.

Inter-Rater Reliability, Construct Validity, and Feasibility of the Modified "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) Questionnaires for Assessing the Use of Complementary Health Approaches in Pediatric Oncology

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to test the inter-rater reliability, construct validity, and feasibility of the modified "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) questionnaires in pediatric oncology; Methods: Parent-child dyads were invited to complete self- and proxy-report-modified WHAT, Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, demographics, a diary of the child's recent use of CHA, and a questionnaire assessing the aspects of feasibility. Parents were asked to complete a satisfaction of their children's use of the CHA survey; Results: Twenty-four dyads completed the study. The mean weighted kappa showed strong inter-rater reliability (k = 0.77, SE = 0.056), and strong agreements between the modified WHAT and the diary (self-report [k = 0.806, SE = 0.046] and proxy-report [k = 0.894, SE = 0.057]). Significant relationships were found only between recent and non-recent CHA users in relation to the easy access to CHA (self-report [p = 0.02], proxy-report [p < 0.001]). The mean scores of the feasibility scale (out of 7.0) for the self- and proxy-report were 5.64 (SD = 0.23) and 5.81 (SD = 0.22), respectively, indicating the feasibility of the modified WHAT; Conclusions: The findings provide initial evidence of the reliability and validity of the modified WHAT and their feasibility. Further research is needed to test the theoretical relationships and further explore the validity and reliability of the modified WHAT.

OMERACT consensus-based operational definition of contextual factors in rheumatology clinical trials: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

To develop an operational definition of contextual factors (CF) [1].

METHODS

Based on previously conducted interviews, we presented three CF types in a Delphi survey; Effect Modifying -, Outcome Influencing - and Measurement Affecting CFs. Subsequently, a virtual Special Interest Group (SIG) session was held for in depth discussion of Effect Modifying CFs.

RESULTS

Of 161 Delphi participants, 129 (80%) completed both rounds. After two rounds, we reached consensus (≥70% agreeing) for all but two statements. The 45 SIG participants were broadly supportive.

CONCLUSION

Through consensus we developed an operational definition of CFs, which was well received by OMERACT members.

Questionnaires assessing the use of complementary health approaches in pediatrics and their measurement properties: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To identify questionnaires assessing the use of complementary health approaches (CHA) in pediatrics, describe their content, and appraise the methodological quality of the studies and the measurement properties of the questionnaires.

METHOD

Major electronic databases were searched from 2011 to 2020. Studies which aimed to assess the use of CHA and studies which reported developing and validating CHA questionnaires in pediatrics were included. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and rated the methodological quality of the studies and measurement properties of the questionnaires using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. When consensus was not reached, a third reviewer was consulted.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were included. From these studies, 35 CHA questionnaires with a variety of different items were identified. Only two studies aimed to evaluate the measurement properties of two questionnaires. One questionnaire, available as a self- and proxy-report, was initially validated in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and the other, available as an interviewer-administered questionnaire, was validated in children with cancer. According to the COSMIN, the methodological quality of both studies was inadequate or doubtful, and both questionnaires was not thoroughly validated.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review showed a lack of a thoroughly validated CHA questionnaire in pediatrics. However, two questionnaires were found to hold promise. To address this gap, one of the existing questionnaires should be adapted and further validated.

Yoga and Aerobic Dance for Pain Management in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is one of the most common types of arthritis among children. According to JIA guidelines for physical activity (PA), structured PA interventions led to improved health outcomes. However, many PA programs, such as yoga and aerobic dance, have not been studied in this population despite being popular among youth. Web-based PA programs could provide patients with accessible and affordable interventions.

Objective

The primary aims of the proposed pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) are to examine (1) the feasibility of conducting a full-scale RCT to evaluate the effectiveness of two popular types of PA: a yoga training program and an aerobic dance training program, in female adolescents (aged 13-18 years) with JIA compared with an electronic pamphlet control group; and (2) the acceptability of these interventions.

Methods

A three-arm prospective randomized open-label study with a parallel group design will be used. A total of 25 female adolescents with JIA who have pain will be randomized in a ratio of 2:2:1 to one of the 3 groups: (1) online yoga training program (group A: n=10); (2) online aerobic dance training program (group B: n=10); and (3) electronic pamphlet control group (group C: n=5). Participants in groups A and B will complete 3 individual 1-hour sessions per week using online exercise videos, as well as a 1-hour virtual group session per week using a videoconferencing platform for 12 weeks. Participants from all groups will have access to an electronic educational pamphlet on PA for arthritis developed by the Arthritis Society. All participants will also take part in weekly online consultations with a research coordinator and discussions on Facebook with participants from their own group. Feasibility (ie, recruitment rate, self-reported adherence to the interventions, dropout rates, and percentage of missing data), acceptability, and usability of Facebook and the videoconferencing platform will be assessed at the end of the program. Pain intensity, participation in general PA, morning stiffness, functional status, fatigue, self-efficacy, patient global assessment, disease activity, and adverse events will be assessed using self-administered electronic surveys at baseline and then weekly until the end of the 12-week program.

Results

This pilot RCT has been funded by the Arthritis Health Professions Association. This protocol was approved by the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Ethics Board (#17/08X). As of May 11, 2020, recruitment and data collection have not started.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the effectiveness of yoga and aerobic dance as pain management interventions for female adolescents with JIA. The use of online programs to disseminate these 2 PA interventions may facilitate access to alternative methods of pain management. This study can lead to a full-scale RCT.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/12823

Tramadol for osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Tramadol is often prescribed to treat pain and is associated physical disability in osteoarthritis (OA). Due to the pharmacologic mechanism of tramadol, it may lead to fewer associated adverse effects (i.e. gastrointestinal bleeding or renal problems) compared to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). This is an update of a Cochrane Review originally published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of oral tramadol or tramadol combined with acetaminophen or NSAIDs in people with osteoarthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase databases, as well as the US National Institutes of Health and World Health Organization trial registries up to February 2018. We searched the LILACS database up to August 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of tramadol, or tramadol in combination with acetaminophen (paracetamol) or NSAIDs versus placebo or any comparator in people with osteoarthritis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs (11 more than the previous review) of which 21 RCTs were included in meta-analyses for 3871 participants randomized to tramadol alone or tramadol in combination with another analgesic and 2625 participants randomized to placebo or active control. Seventeen studies evaluated tramadol alone and five evaluated tramadol plus acetaminophen. Thirteen studies used placebo controls and eleven studies used active controls (two trials had both placebo and active arms). The dose of tramadol ranged from 37.5 mg to 400 mg daily; all doses were pooled. Most trials were multicenter with a mean duration of two months. Participants were predominantly women with hip or knee osteoarthritis, with a mean age of 63 years and moderate to severe pain. There was a high risk of selection bias as only four trials reported both adequate sequence generation and allocation concealment. There was a low risk for performance bias as most studies blinded participants. There was a high risk of attrition bias as 10/22 trials showed incomplete outcome data. Most of the trials were funded by the pharmaceutical industry.Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that tramadol alone and in combination with acetaminophen had no important benefit on pain reduction compared to placebo control (tramadol alone: 4% absolute improvement, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3% to 5%; 8 studies, 3972 participants; tramadol in combination with acetaminophen: 4% absolute improvement, 95% CI 2% to 6%; 2 studies, 614 participants).Fifteen out of 100 people in the tramadol group improved by 20% (which corresponded to a clinically important difference in pain) compared to 10/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement). Twelve out of 100 people improved by 20% in the tramadol in combination with acetaminophen group compared to 7/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement).Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that tramadol alone and in combination with acetaminophen led to no important benefit in physical function compared to placebo (tramadol alone: 4% absolute improvement, 95% CI 2% to 6%; 5 studies, 2550 participants; tramadol in combination with acetaminophen: 4% absolute improvement, 95% CI 2% to 7%; 2 studies, 614 participants).Twenty-one out of 100 people in the tramadol group improved by 20% (which corresponded to a clinically important difference in physical function) compared to 16/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement). Fifteen out of 100 people improved by 20% in the tramadol in combination with acetaminophen group compared to 10/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement).Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that, compared to placebo, there was a greater risk of developing adverse events with tramadol alone (risk ratio (RR) 1.34, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.46; 4 studies, 2039 participants) and tramadol in combination with acetaminophen compared to placebo (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.76; 1 study, 308 participants). This corresponded to a 17% increase (95% CI 12% to 23%) with tramadol alone and 22% increase (95% CI 8% to 41%) with tramadol in combination with acetaminophen.The three most frequent adverse events were nausea, dizziness and tiredness. Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that there was a greater risk of withdrawing from the study because of adverse events with tramadol alone compared to placebo (RR 2.64, 95% CI 2.17 to 3.20; 9 studies, 4533 participants), which corresponded to a 12% increase (95% CI 9% to 16%).Low quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias and inconsistency) indicated that there was a greater risk of withdrawing from the study because of adverse events with tramadol in combination with acetaminophen compared to placebo (RR 2.78, 95% CI 1.50 to 5.16; 2 studies, 614 participants), which corresponded to a 8% absolute improvement (95% CI 2% to 19%).Low quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision) indicated that there was a greater risk of developing serious adverse events with tramadol alone compared to placebo (110/2459 participants with tramadol compared to 22/1153 participants with placebo; RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.84; 7 studies, 3612 participants), which corresponded to a 1% increase (95% CI 0% to 4%). There were no serious adverse events reported in one small study (15 participants) of tramadol with acetaminophen compared to placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate quality evidence indicates that compared to placebo, tramadol alone or in combination with acetaminophen probably has no important benefit on mean pain or function in people with osteoarthritis, although slightly more people in the tramadol group report an important improvement (defined as 20% or more). Moderate quality evidence shows that adverse events probably cause substantially more participants to stop taking tramadol. The increase in serious adverse events with tramadol is less certain, due to the small number of events.

Tramadol for osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Tramadol is often prescribed to treat pain and is associated physical disability in osteoarthritis (OA). Due to the pharmacologic mechanism of tramadol, it may lead to fewer associated adverse effects (i.e. gastrointestinal bleeding or renal problems) compared to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). This is an update of a Cochrane Review originally published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of oral tramadol or tramadol combined with acetaminophen or NSAIDs in people with osteoarthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Embase databases, as well as the US National Institutes of Health and World Health Organization trial registries up to February 2018. We searched the LILACS database up to August 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of tramadol, or tramadol in combination with acetaminophen (paracetamol) or NSAIDs versus placebo or any comparator in people with osteoarthritis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs (11 more than the previous review) of which 21 RCTs were included in meta-analyses for 3871 participants randomized to tramadol alone or tramadol in combination with another analgesic and 2625 participants randomized to placebo or active control. Seventeen studies evaluated tramadol alone and five evaluated tramadol plus acetaminophen. Thirteen studies used placebo controls and eleven studies used active controls (two trials had both placebo and active arms). The dose of tramadol ranged from 37.5 mg to 400 mg daily; all doses were pooled. Most trials were multicenter with a mean duration of two months. Participants were predominantly women with hip or knee osteoarthritis, with a mean age of 63 years and moderate to severe pain. There was a high risk of selection bias as only four trials reported both adequate sequence generation and allocation concealment. There was a low risk for performance bias as most studies blinded participants. There was a high risk of attrition bias as 10/22 trials showed incomplete outcome data. Most of the trials were funded by the pharmaceutical industry.Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that tramadol alone and in combination with acetaminophen had no important benefit on pain reduction compared to placebo control (tramadol alone: 4% absolute improvement, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3% to 5%; 8 studies, 3972 participants; tramadol in combination with acetaminophen: 4% absolute improvement, 95% CI 2% to 6%; 2 studies, 614 participants).Fifteen out of 100 people in the tramadol group improved by 20% (which corresponded to a clinically important difference in pain) compared to 10/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement). Twelve out of 100 people improved by 20% in the tramadol in combination with acetaminophen group compared to 7/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement).Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that tramadol alone and in combination with acetaminophen led to no important benefit in physical function compared to placebo (tramadol alone: 4% absolute improvement, 95% CI 2% to 6%; 5 studies, 2550 participants; tramadol in combination with acetaminophen: 4% absolute improvement, 95% CI 2% to 7%; 2 studies, 614 participants).Twenty-one out of 100 people in the tramadol group improved by 20% (which corresponded to a clinically important difference in physical function) compared to 16/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement). Fifteen out of 100 people improved by 20% in the tramadol in combination with acetaminophen group compared to 10/100 in the placebo group (5% absolute improvement).Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that, compared to placebo, there was a greater risk of developing adverse events with tramadol alone (risk ratio (RR) 1.34, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.46; 4 studies, 2039 participants) and tramadol in combination with acetaminophen compared to placebo (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.76; 1 study, 308 participants). This corresponded to a 17% increase (95% CI 12% to 23%) with tramadol alone and 22% increase (95% CI 8% to 41%) with tramadol in combination with acetaminophen.The three most frequent adverse events were nausea, dizziness and tiredness. Moderate quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias) indicated that there was a greater risk of withdrawing from the study because of adverse events with tramadol alone compared to placebo (RR 2.64, 95% CI 2.17 to 3.20; 9 studies, 4533 participants), which corresponded to a 12% increase (95% CI 9% to 16%).Low quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias and inconsistency) indicated that there was a greater risk of withdrawing from the study because of adverse events with tramadol in combination with acetaminophen compared to placebo (RR 2.78, 95% CI 1.50 to 5.16; 2 studies, 614 participants), which corresponded to a 8% absolute improvement (95% CI 2% to 19%).Low quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision) indicated that there was a greater risk of developing serious adverse events with tramadol alone compared to placebo (110/2459 participants with tramadol compared to 22/1153 participants with placebo; RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.84; 7 studies, 3612 participants), which corresponded to a 1% increase (95% CI 0% to 4%). There were no serious adverse events reported in one small study (15 participants) of tramadol with acetaminophen compared to placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate quality evidence indicates that compared to placebo, tramadol alone or in combination with acetaminophen probably has no important benefit on mean pain or function in people with osteoarthritis, although slightly more people in the tramadol group report an important improvement (defined as 20% or more). Moderate quality evidence shows that adverse events probably cause substantially more participants to stop taking tramadol. The increase in serious adverse events with tramadol is less certain, due to the small number of events.

Models of Care for addressing chronic musculoskeletal pain and health in children and adolescents

Chronic musculoskeletal pain among children and adolescents is common and can negatively affect quality of life. It also represents a high burden on the health system. Effective models of care for addressing the prevention and management of pediatric musculoskeletal pain are imperative. This chapter will address the following key questions: (1) Why are pediatric-specific models of pain care needed? (2) What is the burden of chronic musculoskeletal pain among children and adolescents? (3) What are the best practice approaches for early identification and prevention of chronic musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents? (4) What are the recommended strategies for clinical management of chronic pain, including pharmacological, physical, psychological and complementary, and alternative approaches? (5) What are the most effective strategies for implementing models of pain care across different care settings? (6) What are the research priorities to improve models of care for children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain?

OA Go Away: Development and Preliminary Validation of a Self-Management Tool to Promote Adherence to Exercise and Physical Activity for People with Osteoarthritis of the Hip or Knee

Purpose: To determine the face and content validity, construct validity, and test-retest reliability of the OA Go Away (OGA), a personalized self-management tool to promote adherence to exercise and physical activity for people with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee. Methods: The face and content validity of OGA version 1.0 were determined via interviews with 10 people with OA of the hip or knee and 10 clinicians. A revised OGA version 2.0 was then tested for construct validity and test-retest reliability with a new sample of 50 people with OA of the hip or knee by comparing key items in the OGA journal with validated outcome measures assessing similar health outcomes and comparing scores on key items of the journal 4-7 days apart. Face and content validity were then confirmed with a new sample of 5 people with OA of the hip or knee and 5 clinicians. Results: Eighteen of 30 items from the OGA version 1.0 and 41 of 43 items from the OGA version 2.0 journal, goals and action plan, and exercise log had adequate content validity. Construct validity and test-retest reliability were acceptable for the main items of the OGA version 2.0 journal. The OGA underwent modifications based on results and participant feedback. Conclusion: The OGA is a novel self-management intervention and assessment tool for people with OA of the hip or knee that shows adequate preliminary measurement properties.

Development and Alpha-testing of a Stepped Decision Aid for Patients Considering Nonsurgical Options for Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis Management

Objective.

To develop an innovative stepped patient decision aid (StDA) comparing the benefits and harms of 13 nonsurgical treatment options for managing osteoarthritis (OA) and to evaluate its acceptability and effects on informed decision making.

Methods.

Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, the process involved (1) developing a decision aid with evidence on 13 nonsurgical treatments from the 2012 American College of Rheumatology OA clinical practice guidelines; and (2) interviewing patients with OA and healthcare providers to test its acceptability and effects on knowledge and decisional conflict.

Results.

The StDA helped make the decision explicit, and presented evidence on 13 OA treatments clustered into 5 steps or levels according to their benefits and harms. Probabilities of benefits and harms were presented using pictograms of 100 faces formatted to allow comparisons across sets of options. It also included a values clarification exercise and knowledge test. Feedback was obtained from 49 patients and 7 healthcare providers. They found that the StDA presented evidence in a clear manner, and helped patients clarify their values and make an informed decision. Some participants found that there was too much information and others said that there was not enough on each treatment option.

Conclusion.

This innovative StDA allows patients to consider both the evidence and their values for multiple options. The findings are being used to revise and plan future evaluation. The StDA is an example of how research evidence in guidelines can be implemented in practice.

Application of Rasch analysis to the parent adherence report questionnaire in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Adherence to treatment in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is associated with better outcomes. Assessing patient adherence in JIA, as well as attitudes and beliefs about prescribed treatments, is important for the clinician in order to optimize patient management. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Parent (proxy-report) Adherence Report Questionnaires (PARQ), which assesses beliefs and behaviors related to adherence to treatments prescribed for JIA.

METHODS

A Rasch analysis was conducted on data collected with parents of children with JIA from two studies in which the PARQ was used as a measure of adherence.

RESULTS

The PARQ showed preliminary evidence of multidimensionality with two factors, accounting for 38 % and 27 % of the variance respectively. The PARQ in its original version does not adhere to expectations of the Rasch model. A transformed version of the PARQ obtained by deletion of the general adherence scale and modification of visual analog scales into 5-point likert scales improved fit to the model and showed preliminary evidence of unidimensionality.

CONCLUSIONS

The PARQ was transformed based on the results of the Rasch analysis. The transformed version of the PARQ shows preliminary evidence of unidimensionality and may allow computation of a total score, although further testing is needed to verify these findings.

Proceedings of the 2016 Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Scientific Meeting : Toronto, Canada. 14-17 April 2016

P1 Serologic evidence of gut-driven systemic inflammation in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Lampros Fotis, Nur Shaikh, Kevin Baszis, Anthony French, Phillip Tarr P2 Oral health and anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies (ACPA) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis Sriharsha Grevich, Peggy Lee, Sarah Ringold, Brian Leroux, Hannah Leahey, Megan Yuasa, Jessica Foster, Jeremy Sokolove, Lauren Lahey, William Robinson, Joshua Newsom, Anne Stevens P3 Novel autoantigens for endothelial cell antibodies in pediatric rheumatic diseases identified by proteomics Rie Karasawa, Mayumi Tamaki, Megumi Tanaka, Toshiko Sato, Kazuo Yudoh, James N. Jarvis P4 Transcriptional profiling reveals monocyte signature associated with JIA patient poor response to methotrexate Halima Moncrieffe, Mark F. Bennett, Monica Tsoras, Lorie Luyrink, Huan Xu, Sampath Prahalad, Paula Morris, Jason Dare, Peter A. Nigrovic, Margalit Rosenkranz, Mara Becker, Kathleen M. O’Neil, Thomas Griffin, Daniel J. Lovell, Alexei A. Grom, Mario Medvedovic, Susan D. Thompson P5 A multi-dimensional genomic map for polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis Lisha Zhu, Kaiyu Jiang, Laiping Wong, Michael J Buck, Yanmin Chen, Halima Moncrieffe, Laura Brungs, Tao Liu, Ting Wang, James N Jarvis P6 Tocilizumab for treatment of children with refractory JIA Khaled Alsaeid, Jasim Alfailakawi, Hamid Alenezi, Hazim Alsaeed P7 Clinical characteristics of the initial patients enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry Tim Beukelman, Marc Natter, Norm Ilowite, Kelly Mieszkalski, Grendel Burrell, Brian Best, Helen Bristow, Shannon Carr, Anne Dennos, Rachel Kaufmann, Yukiko Kimura, Laura Schanberg P8 Comparative performance of small and large clinical centers in a comprehensive pediatric rheumatology disease registry Peter R Blier P9 Clinical characteristics of children with membranous lupus nephritis: The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Legacy Registry Alexis Boneparth, Scott E. Wenderfer, L. Nandini Moorthy, Suhas M. Radhakrishna, Anna Carmela P. Sagcal-Gironella, Emily von Scheven P10 Rituximab use in pediatric lupus anticoagulant hypoprothrombinemia syndrome - a two center experience Kader Cetin Gedik, Salma Siddique, Cassyanne L. Aguiar, Doruk Erkan P11 Predictors of complementary and alternative medicine use and response in children with musculoskeletal conditions Ezra Cohen, Yvonne Lee, Michelle Dossett, Darshan Mehta, Roger Davis P12 Comparison of pediatric rheumatology and nephrology survey results for the treatment of refractory proliferative lupus nephritis and renal flare in juvenile SLE Mileka Gilbert, Beatrice Goilav, Esra Meidan, Joyce Hsu, Alexis Boneparth, Anabelle Chua, Stacy Ardoin, Scott E. Wenderfer, Emily Von Scheven, Natasha M. Ruth P13 Transitioning lupus patients from pediatric to adult rheumatology Joyce Hui-Yuen, Kader Cetin Gedik, Liza Bermudez, Ashlea Cook, Lisa Imundo, Amy Starr, Andrew Eichenfield, Anca Askanase P14 The systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis cohort of the Childhood Arthritis & Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry Ginger Janow, Laura E. Schanberg, Soko Setoguchi, Victor Hasselblad, Elizabeth D. Mellins, Rayfel Schneider, Yukiko Kimura, The CARRA Legacy Registry Investigators P15 Results of the pilot study of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) consensus treatment plans for new-onset systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis Yukiko Kimura, Sriharsha Grevich, Timothy Beukelman, Esi Morgan, T Brent Graham, Maria Ibarra, Yonit Sterba Ruas, Marisa Klein-Gitelman, Karen Onel, Sampath Prahalad, Marilynn Punaro, Sarah Ringold, Dana Toib, Heather Van Mater, Jennifer E. Weiss, Pamela F. Weiss, Kelly Mieszkalski, Laura E. Schanberg P16 A systemic review of pain relief modalities in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: First step in developing a novel decision support intervention Timothy S. H. Kwok, Jacinthe Bisaillon, Christine Smith, Lucie Brosseau, Jennifer Stinson, Adam M. Huber, Ciaran M. Duffy, Karine Toupin April P17 Barriers and facilitators to care retention for pediatric systemic lupus erythematous patients in South Africa: A qualitative study Laura B Lewandowski, Christiaan Scott P18 Evaluating the feasibility of conducting comparative effectiveness studies in juvenile Localized Scleroderma (jLS) Suzanne C. Li, Kathryn S. Torok, C. Egla Rabinovich, Sandy D. Hong, Mara L Becker, Fatma Dedeoglu, Maria F. Ibarra, Polly J Ferguson, Rob C. Fuhbrigge, Katie G. Stewart, Elena Pope, Ronald M. Laxer, Thomas G. Mason, Gloria C. Higgins, Xiaohu Li, Marilynn G. Punaro, George Tomlinson, Eleanor Pullenayegum, John Matelski, Laura Schanberg, Brian M. Feldman P19 Tonsillar histology in patients with periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis, adenitis (PFAPA) syndrome Kalpana Manthiram, Hernan Correa, Kathryn Edwards P20 Clinical course of juvenile dermatomyositis presenting as skin predominant disease Edward J. Oberle, Michelle Bayer, Dominic O. Co, Hatice Ezgi Baris, Yvonne Chiu, Adam Huber, Susan Kim P21 A Survey of musculoskeletal ultrasound practices of pediatric rheumatologists in North America Edward J Oberle, Timothy Beukelman P22 Assessment, classification and treatment of calcinosis as a complication of juvenile dermatomyositis: A survey of pediatric rheumatologists by the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Amir B. Orandi, Kevin W. Baszis, Vikas Dharnidharka, Mark F. Hoeltzel, for the CARRA JDM Committee P23 CARRA dermatomyositis CTP pilot study Ann Reed, Adam Huber, George Tomlinson, Eleanor Pullenayegum, John Matelski, Y. Ingrid Goh, Laura Schanberg, Brian M. Feldman P24 Unexpectedly high incidences and prolonged disease activity in children with chronic non-bacterial osteomyelitis (CNO) as compared to bacterial osteomyelitis Anja Schnabel, Ursula Range, Gabriele Hahn, Timo Siepmann, Reinhard Berner, Christian Michael Hedrich P25 Juvenile systemic sclerosis cohort within the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Legacy Registry: Follow up characteristics Brandi Stevens, Kathryn S. Torok, Suzanne Li, Nicole Hershey, Megan Curran, Gloria Higgins, Katharine Moore, Egla Rabinovich, Anne M. Stevens, for the CARRA Registry Investigators P26 Development and usability testing of an iPad and desktop psycho-educational game for children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and their parents Jennifer Stinson, Mark Connelly, Adam Huber, Nadia Luca, Lynn Spiegel, Argerie Tsimicalis, Stephanie Luca, Naweed Tajuddin, Roberta Berard, Julia Barsalou, Sarah Campillo, Paul Dancey, Ciaran Duffy, Brian Feldman, Nicole Johnson, Patrick McGrath, Natalie Shiff, Shirley Tse, Lori Tucker, Charles Victor P27 iCanCope^TM: User-centred design and development of a smartphone app to support self-management for youth with arthritis pain Jennifer Stinson, Chitra Lalloo, Lauren Harris, Joseph Cafazzo, Lynn Spiegel, Brian Feldman, Nadia Luca, Ronald Laxer P28 Accessing pediatric rheumatology care: Despite barriers, few parents prefer telemedicine Danielle R. Bullock, Richard K. Vehe, Lei Zhang, Colleen K. Correll¹ P29 Exploration of factors contributing to time to achieve clinically inactive disease (CID) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA): A preliminary report Suhas Ganguli, Max Shenberger, Ritesh Korumilli, Beth Gottlieb P30 Pediatric rheumatology referral patterns: Presenting complaints of new patients at a large, urban academic center Martha Rodriguez, Deirdre de Ranieri, Karen Onel, Linda Wagner-Weiner, Melissa Tesher P31 Quality improvement (QI) initiatives in childhood systemic lupus erythematosus (cSLE) Elizabeth Roth Wojcicki, Kristyn L. Maletta, Dominic O. Co, Marsha Malloy, Sarah Thomson, Judyann C. Olson P32 Proliferative lupus nephritis in juvenile SLE: Support from the pediatric nephrology community for the definitions of responsiveness and flare in the 2012 consensus treatment plans Scott E. Wenderfer, Mileka Gilbert, Joyce Hsu, Sangeeta Sule, Tamar B. Rubinstein, Beatrice Goilav, Daryl M. Okamura, Annabelle Chua, Laurence A. Greenbaum, Jerome C. Lane, Emily von Scheven, Stacy P. Ardoin, Natasha M. Ruth P33 The steroid taper app: Making of a mobile app Jennifer M. P. Woo, Marsha M. Malloy, James A. Jegers, Dustin J. Hahn, Mary K. Hintermeyer, Stacey M. Martinetti, Gretchen R. Heckel, Elizabeth L. Roth-Wojcicki, Dominic O. Co

Development and Preliminary Face and Content Validation of the "Which Health Approaches and Treatments Are You Using?" (WHAT) Questionnaires Assessing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use in Pediatric Rheumatology

Objective

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is commonly used by children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), yet no validated questionnaires assess that use. The objective of this study was to develop child self- and parent proxy-report questionnaires assessing CAM use and to determine the face and content validity of the “Which Health Approaches and Treatments are you using?” (WHAT) questionnaires in pediatric rheumatology.

Methods

A sequential phased mixed methods approach was used to develop the questionnaires. A Delphi Survey of 126 experts followed by an interdisciplinary consensus conference of 14 stakeholders in CAM, general pediatrics and pediatric rheumatology was held to develop consensus on the content of the questionnaires using a nominal group technique. To determine face and content validity of the questionnaires, two groups, including (a) a purposive sample of 22 children with JIA 8 to 18 years and their parents from the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario and the Hospital for Sick Children, and (b) 21 Canadian pediatric rheumatology experts, participated in interviews. Participants were independently asked about the goal, understandability and comprehensiveness of the WHAT questionnaires, as well as the relevance of items.

Results

Consensus was reached on 17 items of the WHAT questionnaires. The domains found to be relevant were child’s CAM use, factors associated with CAM use, perceived impact of CAM use, and communication about CAM. A total of 15 items in the parent proxy-report questionnaire and 13 items in the child report questionnaire showed adequate content validity.

Conclusions

Consensus was reached by experts on the content of a pediatric CAM questionnaire. Face and content validity testing and modifications made to the WHAT questionnaires have helped ensure adequate preliminary validity for use in pediatric rheumatology. This constitutes the basis for further testing of these questionnaires in pediatric rheumatology and for adaptation to other chronic diseases.

Internet-based implementation of non-pharmacological interventions of the "people getting a grip on arthritis" educational program: an international online knowledge translation randomized controlled trial design protocol

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects 2.1% of the Australian population (1.5% males; 2.6% females), with the highest prevalence from ages 55 to over 75 years (4.4-6.1%). In Canada, RA affects approximately 0.9% of adults, and within 30 years that is expected to increase to 1.3%. With an aging population and a greater number of individuals with modifiable risk factors for chronic diseases, such as arthritis, there is an urgent need for co-care management of arthritic conditions. The increasing trend and present shifts in the health services and policy sectors suggest that digital information delivery is becoming more prominent. Therefore, it is necessary to further investigate the use of online resources for RA information delivery.

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to examine the effect of implementing an online program provided to patients with RA, the People Getting a Grip on Arthritis for RA (PGrip-RA) program, using information communication technologies (ie, Facebook and emails) in combination with arthritis health care professional support and electronic educational pamphlets. We believe this can serve as a useful and economical method of knowledge translation (KT).

METHODS

This KT randomized controlled trial will use a prospective randomized open-label blinded-endpoint design to compare four different intervention approaches of the PGrip-RA program to a control group receiving general electronic educational pamphlets self-management in RA via email. Depending on group allocation, links to the Arthritis Society PGrip-RA material will be provided either through Facebook or by email. One group will receive feedback online from trained health care professionals. The intervention period is 6 weeks. Participants will have access to the Internet-based material after the completion of the baseline questionnaires until the final follow-up questionnaire at 6 months. We will invite 396 patients from Canadian and Australian Arthritis Consumers' Associations to participate using online recruitment.

RESULTS

This study will build on a pilot study using Facebook, which revealed promising effects of knowledge acquisition/integration of the evidence-based self-management PGrip educational program.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of online techniques to disseminate knowledge provides an opportunity to reduce health care costs by facilitating self-management of people with arthritis. Study design strengths include the incorporation of randomization and allocation concealment to ensure internal validity. To avoid intergroup contamination, the Facebook group page security settings will be set to "closed", thus allowing only invited participants to access it. Study limitations include the lack of participant blinding due to the characteristics of this KT randomized controlled trial and a potential bias of recruiting patients only online, though this was proven effective in the previous pilot study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12614000397617; http://www.anzctr.org.au/TrialSearch.aspx (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6PrP0kQf8).

Leisure in children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a systematic review

The aim of this systematic review is to describe participation in social and physical leisure activities among children and adolescents with JIA, as well as identify potential determinants of leisure participation.

METHODS

Electronic databases were systematically searched for articles published up until June 2013 pertaining to participation in leisure activities among youth with JIA and other rheumatic diseases. Studies were included if they measured involvement in either social or physical leisure activities. Selection and quality appraisal of articles were completed independently by two authors.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and ninety-three articles were found through electronic and reference search. One hundred and nine full articles were reviewed to assess for eligibility. Twelve articles met inclusion criteria and findings were reviewed. Most focused on describing participation in physical rather than social activities. Results suggest that youth with JIA participated less in both social and physical leisure activities as compared to healthy peers, and those with JIA did not meet national recommendations for physical activity. Potential determinants of leisure participation were socio-demographic (age, sex), anthropometric (height, weight) and disease-related (JIA subtype, disease duration, pain, number of swollen or painful joints, stiffness, fatigue, well-being) factors.

CONCLUSION

Characterization of leisure activity remains limited and mostly focused on physical activity in JIA. Assessment of more comprehensive outcome measures is warranted to obtain a better description of leisure in this population. Evidence of the influence of contextual factors as potential determinants of involvement in leisure among children with pediatric rheumatologic diseases is needed.

A survey of Canadian regulated complementary and alternative medicine schools about research, evidence-based health care and interprofessional training, as well as continuing education

BACKGROUND

While some effort has been made to integrate complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) information in conventional biomedical training, it is unclear whether regulated Canadian CAM schools' students are exposed to research activities and continuing education, or whether topics such as evidence-based health care and interprofessional collaboration (IPC) are covered during their training. Since these areas are valued by the biomedical training field, this may help to bridge the attitudinal and communication gaps between these different practices. The aim of this study was to describe the training offered in these areas and gather the perceptions of curriculum/program directors in regulated Canadian CAM schools.

METHODS

A two-phase study consisting of an electronic survey and subsequent semi-structured telephone interviews was conducted with curriculum/program (C/P) directors in regulated Canadian CAM schools. Questions assessed the extent of the research, evidence-based health care, IPC training and continuing education, as well as the C/P directors' perceptions about the training. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the schools', curriculum's and the C/P directors' characteristics. Content analysis was conducted on the interview material.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight C/P directors replied to the electronic survey and 11 participated in the interviews, representing chiropractic, naturopathy, acupuncture and massage therapy schools. Canadian regulated CAM schools offered research and evidence-based health care training as well as opportunities for collaboration with biomedical peers and continuing education to a various extent (58% to 91%). Although directors were generally satisfied with the training offered at their school, they expressed a desire for improvements. They felt future CAM providers should understand research findings and be able to rely on high quality research and to communicate with conventional care providers as well as to engage in continuing education. Limited length of the curriculum was one of the barriers to such improvements.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings seem to reinforce the directors' interest and the importance of integrating these topics in order to ensure best CAM practices and improve communication between CAM and conventional providers.

Update of strategies to translate evidence from cochrane musculoskeletal group systematic reviews for use by various audiences

For rheumatology research to have a real influence on health and well-being, evidence must be tailored to inform the decisions of various audiences. The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group (CMSG), one of 53 groups of the not-for-profit international Cochrane Collaboration, prepares, maintains, and disseminates systematic reviews of treatments for musculoskeletal diseases. While systematic reviews provided by the CMSG fill a major gap in meeting the need for high-quality evidence syntheses, our work does not end at the completion of a review. The term "knowledge translation" (KT) refers to the activities involved in bringing research evidence to various audiences in a useful form so it can be used to support decision making and improve practices. Systematic reviews give careful consideration to research methods and analysis. Because the review is often long and detailed, the clinically relevant results may not be apparent or in the optimal form for use by patients and their healthcare practitioners. This paper describes 10 formats, many of them new, for ways that evidence from Cochrane Reviews can be translated with the intention of meeting the needs of various audiences, including patients and their families, practitioners, policy makers, the press, and members of the public (the "5 Ps"). Current and future knowledge tools include summary of findings tables, patient decision aids, plain language summaries, press releases, clinical scenarios in general medical journals, frequently asked questions (Cochrane Clinical Answers), podcasts, Twitter messages, Journal Club materials, and the use of storytelling and narratives to support continuing medical education. Future plans are outlined to explore ways of improving the influence and usefulness of systematic reviews by providing results in formats suitable to our varied audiences.

A qualitative study on the term CAM: is there a need to reinvent the wheel?

Background

As complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has developed extensively, uncertainty about the appropriateness of the terms CAM and other CAM-related terms has grown both in the research and practice communities. Various terms and definitions have been proposed over the last three decades, highlighting how little agreement exits in the field. Contextual use of current terms and their respective definitions needs to be discussed and addressed.

Methods

Relying upon the results of a large international Delphi survey on the adequacy of the term CAM, a focus group of 13 international experts in the field of CAM was held. A forum was also set up for 28 international experts to discuss and refine proposed definitions of both CAM and integrative healthcare (IHC) terms. Audio recordings of the meeting and forum discussion threads were analyzed using interpretive description.

Results

Multiple terms to describe the therapies, products, and disciplines often referred to as CAM, were considered. Even though participants generally agreed there is a lack of optimal definitions for popular CAM-related umbrella terms and that all terms that have so far been introduced are to some extent problematic, CAM and IHC remained the most popular and accepted terms by far. The names of the specific disciplines were also deemed adequate in certain contexts. Focus group participants clarified the context in which those three terms are appropriate. Existing and emergent definitions of both CAM and integrative healthcare terms were discussed.

Conclusions

CAM and other related terms could be used more effectively, provided they are used in the proper context. It appears difficult for the time being to reach a consensus on the definition of the term CAM due to the uncertainty of the positioning of CAM in the contemporary healthcare systems. While umbrella terms such as CAM and IHC are useful in the context of research, policy making and education, relevant stakeholders should limit the use of those terms.

American College of Rheumatology 2012 recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies in osteoarthritis of the hand, hip, and knee

OBJECTIVE

To update the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2000 recommendations for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) and develop new recommendations for hand OA.

METHODS

A list of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic modalities commonly used to manage knee, hip, and hand OA as well as clinical scenarios representing patients with symptomatic hand, hip, and knee OA were generated. Systematic evidence-based literature reviews were conducted by a working group at the Institute of Population Health, University of Ottawa, and updated by ACR staff to include additions to bibliographic databases through December 31, 2010. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, a formal process to rate scientific evidence and to develop recommendations that are as evidence based as possible, was used by a Technical Expert Panel comprised of various stakeholders to formulate the recommendations for the use of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic modalities for OA of the hand, hip, and knee.

RESULTS

Both “strong” and “conditional” recommendations were made for OA management. Modalities conditionally recommended for the management of hand OA include instruction in joint protection techniques, provision of assistive devices, use of thermal modalities and trapeziometacarpal joint splints, and use of oral and topical nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), tramadol, and topical capsaicin. Nonpharmacologic modalities strongly recommended for the management of knee OA were aerobic, aquatic, and/or resistance exercises as well as weight loss for overweight patients. Nonpharmacologic modalities conditionally recommended for knee OA included medial wedge insoles for valgus knee OA, subtalar strapped lateral insoles for varus knee OA, medially directed patellar taping, manual therapy, walking aids, thermal agents, tai chi, self management programs, and psychosocial interventions. Pharmacologic modalities conditionally recommended for the initial management of patients with knee OA included acetaminophen, oral and topical NSAIDs, tramadol, and intraarticular corticosteroid injections; intraarticular hyaluronate injections, duloxetine, and opioids were conditionally recommended in patients who had an inadequate response to initial therapy. Opioid analgesics were strongly recommended in patients who were either not willing to undergo or had contraindications for total joint arthroplasty after having failed medical therapy. Recommendations for hip OA were similar to those for the management of knee OA.

CONCLUSION

These recommendations are based on the consensus judgment of clinical experts from a wide range of disciplines, informed by available evidence, balancing the benefits and harms of both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic modalities, and incorporating their preferences and values. It is hoped that these recommendations will be utilized by health care providers involved in the management of patients with OA.

Measurement properties of questionnaires assessing complementary and alternative medicine use in pediatrics: a systematic review

Objective

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is commonly used by children, but estimates of that use vary widely partly due to the range of questionnaires used to assess CAM use. However, no studies have attempted to appraise measurement properties of these questionnaires. The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise and summarize measurement properties of questionnaires of CAM use in pediatrics.

Study design

A search strategy was implemented in major electronic databases in March 2011 and conference websites, scientific journals and experts were consulted. Studies were included if they mentioned a questionnaire assessing the prevalence of CAM use in pediatrics. Members of the team independently rated the methodological quality of the studies (using the COSMIN checklist) and measurement properties of the questionnaires (using the Terwee and Cohen criteria).

Results

A total of 96 CAM questionnaires were found in 104 publications. The COSMIN checklist showed that no studies reported adequate methodological quality. The Terwee criteria showed that all included CAM questionnaires had indeterminate measurement properties. According to the Cohen score, none were considered to be a well-established assessment, two approached the level of a well-established assessment, seven were promising assessments and the remainder (n = 87) did not reach the score’s minimum standards.

Conclusion

None of the identified CAM questionnaires have been thoroughly validated. This systematic review highlights the need for proper validation of CAM questionnaires in pediatrics, which may in turn lead to improved research and knowledge translation about CAM in clinical practice.

Access and perceived need for physical and occupational therapy in chronic arthritis

PURPOSE

Physical and occupational therapy are beneficial for persons with chronic arthritis; however, access is problematic. The goal was to examine issues related to access to these services for patients with chronic arthritis.

METHODS

We used two data sources: 1) questionnaires sent to a random sample of 600 family physicians and to all 85 rheumatologists in the province of Quebec; and 2) interviews of 211 patients with physician-confirmed chronic arthritis recruited from 34 primary care settings in Quebec.

RESULTS

Only 11.5% of family physicians and 31.7% of rheumatologists referred patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to rehabilitation, whereas 60.4% of family doctors referred patients with osteoarthritis. Only 26.1% of patients felt that they required rehabilitation and this was associated with lower self-efficacy (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72, 0.99) and higher educational level (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.01, 4.36).

CONCLUSION

Family physicians are less likely to refer patients with RA to therapy. Only about a quarter of patients with chronic arthritis treated in primary care perceived the need for these services. Efforts to improve arthritis care should address education of physicians and patients regarding the benefits of rehabilitation and there should be efforts to increase therapy resources in order to enhance access.

Association between perceived treatment adherence and health-related quality of life in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: perspectives of both parents and children

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between perceived treatment adherence and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in children with arthritis, from both parent and child perspectives.

METHODS

Patients and their parents, who attended the juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) clinic at the Montreal Children's Hospital, completed the Juvenile Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire (JAQQ), and either the Child Adherence Report Questionnaire (CARQ) or the Parent Adherence Report Questionnaire (PARQ). Linear regression models examined the associations between perceived treatment adherence and HRQOL while adjusting for age, severity, duration of the disease, and complexity of the medical regimen.

RESULTS

Perceived adherence to medications was associated with a better HRQOL total score from the children's perspective (beta = -0.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.03, -0.004), particularly with respect to gross motor (beta = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.05, -0.01) and psychosocial functions (beta = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.04, -0.01). According to parents, perceived adherence to exercises was associated with fewer symptoms (beta = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.03, 0.000) and better psychosocial functioning (beta = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.03, -0.002).

CONCLUSION

Perceived adherence to medications is associated with an improved HRQOL according to children. According to parents, adherence to exercises may be associated with an improved HRQOL.

Comparison between Children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) and their Parents Concerning Perceived Quality of Life

The aim of the study was to determine the level of agreement between the perceptions of children with JIA and their parents concerning quality of life. Fifty patients aged 9-18 years and their parents, who attended the JIA clinic at the Montreal Children's Hospital, completed the Juvenile Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire (JAQQ). Paired t-tests were employed to compare parents' and children's scores and agreements were analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Linear regression was used to explore factors associated with agreements and with the perceptions of quality of life. ICCs (95% confidence interval) for the subscales of the JAQQ were 0.62 (0.42,0.77) for gross motor function, 0.35 (0.08,0.57) for fine motor function, 0.61 (0.41,0.76) for psychosocial function, 0.70 (0.52,0.82) for systemic symptoms and 0.60 (0.38,0.75) for pain. Agreement was higher for psychosocial function among younger children and for overall quality of life among those who had the disease longer. Higher agreement levels on pain were associated with more severe disease. Disease severity was associated with perceptions of quality of life (p < 0.01). There seems to be good agreement between the perceptions of children with JIA and their parents concerning quality of life, except for fine motor function.

Comparison between children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and their parents concerning perceived treatment adherence

OBJECTIVE

Adherence to treatment in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) may be associated with better outcomes. Clinicians must be aware of possible divergence between parents and children regarding adherence, in order to gain a better understanding of adherence and factors associated with it. The objective was to determine the level of agreement between children with JIA and their parents concerning perception of the child's adherence to the treatment regimen (for both medications and exercises).

METHODS

Fifty patients and their parents, who attended the JIA clinic at the Montreal Children's Hospital, completed the Child Adherence Report Questionnaire and the Parent Adherence Report Questionnaire. Paired t-tests were used to compare parents' and children's scores for adherence questions and agreements were analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

RESULTS

Parents reported that their children showed more negative reactions to taking medication and doing exercises, more helpfulness from the medication, and more difficulty to carry out the exercise program than their children reported. ICCs (95% confidence interval) for medications and exercises were, respectively, 0.32 (0.04, 0.56) and 0.77 (0.61, 0.87) for overall adherence, 0.33 (0.05, 0.57) and 0.39 (0.09, 0.62) for perceived difficulty to following treatment, and 0.37 (0.09, 0.60) and 0.45 (0.17, 0.67) for how often children had negative reactions following treatment. Levels of agreement for perceived helpfulness of treatments were quite low.

CONCLUSION

Agreement between parents and children concerning adherence was at best moderate, and generally better for the exercise program than for prescribed medications.