Rheumatoid Arthritis: Boini S

Boini S, Guillemin F. · UPRES EA 1124- Ecole de Santé Publique, Faculté de Médecine, Nancy, France. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #11502606 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Use of scored radiographs as an outcome measure can help estimate the progression of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Radiographs not only provide permanent records with which to evaluate RA serially, but can also be randomised and blinded, a major advantage in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES AND METHOD: Medline was searched for information about the principal methods of assessing joints affected by RA. Each technique was evaluated for its measurement properties, advantages, and limitations. MAIN FINDINGS: The most commonly used methods are those devised by Sharp, Larsen, and van der Heijde/Sharp, and their variants. Methods based on the Sharp technique provide separate scores for erosion and for joint space narrowing. Larsen and variants, together with the Simple Erosion Narrowing Score (SENS) method, provide an overall score. Each method's measurement properties (feasibility, time consumption, etc) depend on the degree of detail it considers. Authors consistently recommend taking a posteroanterior view of hand and foot radiographs, and the use of trained raters. Intra- and interrater reliability values are generally higher than 0.70 (less often assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient than the correlation coefficient). Sensitivity to change is calculated by several techniques (standardised response mean (SRM), adjusted SRM, minimal detectable change, smallest detectable difference). Most methods assessed with SRM reach a value of 0.80 or more. CONCLUSION: Standardised procedures are available for performing and reading radiographs in RA. The choice of scoring method depends on the time and staff available, and the required degree of reliability and sensitivity to change.

Guillemin F, Billot L, Boini S, Gerard N, Ødegaard S, Kvien TK. · School of Public Health, Nancy, France. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #15868609 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare intrarater and interrater reproducibility and sensitivity to change of 5 scoring methods for radiographic damage on hand radiographs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Radiographs of 22 patients from Norway and France with average 2 years' disease duration at baseline and mean 30 months' followup were assessed by 2 readers according to Larsen, Larsen/Rau, Sharp, Sharp/van der Heijde, and Simple Erosion Narrowing Score (SENS) methods. Reproducibility at baseline and on progression was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman graphs. Sensitivity to change was compared across methods by computing the country-adjusted standardized response means (SRM) ratio. RESULTS: Intrarater reproducibility varied with the reader (ICC ranging from 0.90 to 0.97), with Larsen and Larsen/Rau ranking highest. Interrater reproducibility was highest with Sharp and Sharp/van der Heijde (ICC 0.76 to 0.93). Bland-Altman graphs showed a decrease of concordance in cases of more severe damage. Sensitivity to change was higher with Sharp and Sharp/van der Heijde modified for erosions (SRM ratio 1.44 and 1.70), than with Larsen/Rau and SENS. The differences between Sharp, Sharp/van der Heijde, and Larsen were less for joint space narrowing. There was a significant reader effect (p < 0.05) in all but the Sharp method. Expressed as percentage of the maximum score, the smallest detectable difference varied between 3.5% (Sharp/van der Heijde) and 14.2% (SENS erosion). CONCLUSION: All methods have high intraobserver and interobserver reliability. The interrater reproducibility decreases with disease severity. Recent modified methods perform best to detect changes, but the advantages of SENS seemed to be lost when applied on hand radiographs alone. Training the readers appears to be essential.