Rheumatoid Arthritis: Khanna PP

Amjadi SS, Maranian PM, Paulus HE, Kaplan RM, Ranganath VK, Furst DE, Khanna PP, Khanna D, Anonymous00069. · Division of Rheumatology, University of California Los Angeles School of Medicine, Department of Health Services, 1000 Veteran Avenue, Room 32-59, Rehabilitation Center, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #19369459 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: New methodologies allow the scores for the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) to be translated into preferences/utility scores. We evaluated the construct validity of the HAQ-DI-derived Short Form-6D (SF-6D) score and assessed its responsiveness to change over 6- and 12-month followup periods in patients with early aggressive rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients (n=277) participating in an RA observational study completed self-reported measures of symptoms and the HAQ-DI at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Total Sharp scores, C-reactive protein, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate were assessed along with clinical data. Construct validity was assessed by examining the association between SF-6D score and patient-reported and clinical measures using Spearman correlation coefficients. The responsiveness of SF-6D to change was assessed using patient and physician assessments of the disease as clinical anchors. The magnitude of responsiveness was calculated using SF-6D effect size (ES). RESULT: Mean SF-6D scores were 0.690, 0.720, and 0.723 at baseline and 6 and 12-month followup, respectively. Baseline patient-reported measures had moderate to high correlations with baseline SF-6D (r=0.43 to 0.52); whereas clinical measures had negligible to low correlations with SF-6D (r=0.001 to 0.32). ES was moderate for the groups that were deemed to have improved (ES 0.63-0.75) but negligible to small for those that did not (ES 0.13-0.46). CONCLUSION: Our data support the validity and responsiveness of the HAQ-DI derived SF-6D score in an early RA cohort. These results support the use of the HAQ-DI derived SF-6D in RA cohorts and clinical trials lacking preference-based measures.

Khanna D, Pope JE, Khanna PP, Maloney M, Samedi N, Norrie D, Ouimet G, Hays RD. · Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #19004044 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To estimate the minimally important difference (MID) for a fatigue visual analog scale (VAS) using patient-reported anchors (fatigue, pain, and overall health). METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA; n = 307) had 2 clinic visits at a median of 5.9 months apart. They completed a fatigue VAS (0-10 scale) and the retrospective anchor items, "How would you describe your overall fatigue/pain/overall health since the last visit?" with response options: Much worsened, Somewhat worsened, Same, Somewhat better, or Much better. The fatigue anchor was used for primary analysis and the pain/overall health anchors for sensitivity analyses. The minimally changed group was defined by those reporting they were somewhat better or somewhat worsened. RESULTS: The mean [standard deviation (SD)] age was 59.4 (13.2) years, disease duration was 14.1 (11.5) years, and 83% of patients were women. The baseline mean (SD) Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index score was 0.84 (0.75). The baseline fatigue VAS score was 4.2 (2.9) and at followup was 4.3 (2.8) [mean change of -0.07 (2.5); p = not significant]. The fatigue change score (0-10 scale) for Somewhat better and Somewhat worsened for the fatigue anchor averaged -1.12 and 1.26, respectively. Using the pain anchor, the fatigue change score for Somewhat better and Somewhat worsened averaged -0.87 and 1.13; and using the global anchor, the fatigue change score for Somewhat better and Somewhat worsened averaged -0.82 and 1.17, respectively. Effect size estimates using 3 anchors were small for the Somewhat better (range 0.27-0.39) and Somewhat worsened (0.40-0.44) groups, but larger than for the no-change group (0.03-0.08). CONCLUSION: The MID for fatigue VAS is between -0.82 for -1.12 for improvement and is 1.13 to 1.26 for worsening on a 0-10 scale in a large RA clinical practice, and is similar to that seen in RA clinical trials. This information can aid in interpreting fatigue VAS in day-to-day care in clinical practice.