Rheumatoid Arthritis: Ofman JJ

Ofman JJ, Badamgarav E, Henning JM, Knight K, Gano AD, Levan RK, Gur-Arie S, Richards MS, Hasselblad V, Weingarten SR. · Cedars-Sinai Department of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, USA. · Am J Med. · Pubmed #15300966 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: To assess the clinical and economic effects of disease management in patients with chronic diseases. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for English-language articles from 1987 to 2001. Articles were included if they used a systematic approach to care and evaluated patients with chronic disease, reported objective measurements of the processes or outcomes of care, and employed acceptable experimental or quasi-experimental study designs as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group. RESULTS: Two reviewers evaluated 16,917 titles and identified 102 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Identified studies represented 11 chronic conditions: depression, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic pain, coronary artery disease, asthma, heart failure, back pain, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Disease management programs for patients with depression had the highest percentage of comparisons (48% [41/86]) showing substantial improvements in patient care, whereas programs for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (9% [2/22]) or chronic pain (8% [1/12]) appeared to be the least effective. Of the outcomes more frequently studied, disease management appeared to improve patient satisfaction (71% [12/17]), patient adherence (47% [17/36]), and disease control (45% [33/74]) most commonly and cost-related outcomes least frequently (11% to 16%). CONCLUSION: Disease management programs were associated with marked improvements in many different processes and outcomes of care. Few studies demonstrated a notable reduction in costs. Further research is needed to understand how disease management can most effectively improve the quality and cost of care for patients with chronic diseases.

Badamgarav E, Croft JD, Hohlbauch A, Louie JS, O'Dell J, Ofman JJ, Suarez-Almazor ME, Weaver A, White P, Katz P, Anonymous00232. · Zynx Health Incorporated, Los Angeles, California, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #12794794 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of the published literature on disease management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to use meta-analysis to estimate the magnitude of benefit these programs have on functional status in patients with RA. METHODS: Computerized databases for English articles from 1966 to September 2001 were searched. Two reviewers evaluated 1,029 published titles, identified 11 studies meeting explicit inclusion criteria, and extracted data about study characteristics, interventions used, and outcomes measured. Pooled effect sizes for functional status were calculated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Four out of 8 disease management programs showed significant improvements in functional status; however, the pooled effect size (ES) was small and statistically non-significant (ES 0.27; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.01, 0.54). Studies with longer intervention durations (>5 weeks) had significantly improved patient functional status (ES 0.49; 95% CI 0.12, 0.86), compared with studies with shorter intervention durations (</=5 weeks, ES 0.13; 95% CI -0.25, 0.52). CONCLUSIONS: There were limited data to support or refute the effectiveness of disease management programs in improving functional status in patients with RA. Additional studies are needed to confirm if a more intensive intervention may be of benefit to patients with RA, as suggested by our study.

Straus WL, Ofman JJ. · Merck and Co., Inc, West Point, Pennsylvania, USA. · Gastroenterol Clin North Am. · Pubmed #11764534 No free full text.

Abstract: The large body of literature on the gastrointestinal side effects of NSAIDs has shown consistently that populations can be identified that have a markedly elevated risk for these iatrogenic conditions. These groups include the elderly, persons with prior history of peptic ulcer disease and its complications, persons receiving anticoagulant and corticosteroid therapy, and persons who require long-term NSAID therapy, especially at high dose. It is possible that several comorbidities (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis) predispose patients to gastrointestinal complications caused by NSAIDs, but few studies have adjusted carefully for the possibility that concomitant medication use (e.g., oral anticoagulants, corticosteroids) or increased NSAID dose may account best for apparent association of comorbidities as a risk factor for serious gastrointestinal events. The role of H. pylori infection in affecting the risk of complicated ulcer disease among NSAID users remains to be fully elucidated. Low-dose aspirin for cardioprotective use is associated with an increased risk for PUBs; when used concomitantly with NSAIDs, this increases the risk of PUBs above that of the NSAID itself. Apart from the physical toll NSAID-related gastrotoxicity places on the patient, there are considerable economic consequences to patients, providers, and society. This cost presents a subject for research for those interested not only in improving the quality of patient care, but also in the prudent use of health care resources.

Cohen SB, Strand V, Aguilar D, Ofman JJ. · Radiant Research, Dallas, Texas 75235, USA. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #14997006 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patient-reported outcomes may differentiate treatment response better than physician-reported outcomes for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients being treated with anakinra. METHODS: A meta-analysis was conducted using data obtained from three separate randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) (n = 1007). Outcomes from 6-month assessments were grouped into four categories: American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, patient-reported measures (patient-reported pain, patient global assessment, and assessment of physical function using the Health Assessment Questionnaire), physician-reported measures (tender and swollen joint counts and physician global assessment), and laboratory tests (C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate). Effect sizes were calculated using changes from baseline and pooled standard deviations for each of these types of outcome. RESULTS: Active treatment with anakinra was superior to placebo by ACR(20) responses in all three RCTs. Effect sizes for patient-reported outcomes were greater than for physician-reported outcomes, and also greater than ACR(20) in three of five anakinra cohorts. Across the RCTs, placebo responses were greater with physician-reported than with patient-reported outcomes. In the two studies evaluating patients with longer-standing disease, differences between pooled effect sizes for patient-reported and physician-reported outcomes were even more pronounced. CONCLUSIONS: In three pivotal RCTs, active treatment with anakinra resulted in greater improvements in patient-reported than physician-reported outcomes compared with placebo. These observations confirm those previously reported from RCTs evaluating conventional DMARDs, demonstrating better discrimination of treatment effect with patient-reported outcomes.

Weisman MH, Gano AD, Gabriel SE, Hochberg MC, Kavanaugh A, Ofman JJ, Prashker M, Suarez-Almazor ME, Yelin E, Nakelsky SD, Croft JD, Anonymous00394. · Evidence-Based Medicine Working Groups in Rheumatology, Beverly Hills, CA, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #12913929 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare the relative attributes (reliability, ease of use, applicability, and relevance) of different assessment tools for economic analyses as they pertain to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) literature. METHODS: An expert panel, comprising rheumatology researchers and clinicians, operationalized 2 economic appraisal instruments and applied them to 11 articles used for analysis. Each expert reviewed 3 articles, with each article independently reviewed by a pair of experts. A summary score for each article per appraisal instrument was calculated by dividing the number of items that received a "positive" response by the total number of items in the appraisal instrument. RESULTS: Scores for each article were similar across reviewers and appraisal instruments. CONCLUSION: There is a need for a more comprehensive approach for evaluating this rapidly growing body of economic literature that is not only valid and reliable, but also easy to apply and understand. Although consistency between reviewers was good on both guidelines, inter-guideline discrepancies were noted and reviewers reported some difficulty in using the operationalized format.

Russak SM, Croft JD, Furst DE, Hohlbauch A, Liang MH, Moreland L, Ofman JJ, Paulus H, Simon LS, Weisman M, Tugwell P, Anonymous00333. · Zynx Health Incorporated, Beverly Hills, California, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #12910566 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The utilization of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) patient questionnaires by clinical rheumatologists is limited. Yet, considerable literature exists defining the value of such data. In an effort to understand this apparent paradox, we performed a literature review and conducted a survey to describe what has been learned over the past 2 decades concerning the use of these measures in clinical care and explore the reasons for their underutilization. METHODS: A panel of rheumatologists with extensive clinical experience was convened to review the relevant literature pertaining to the use of HRQOL patient instruments in clinical practice. Additionally, a survey of all American College of Rheumatology practicing clinicians was conducted to assess the use of and beliefs about these measures. RESULTS: The literature provided evidence to support the use of HRQOL patient measures in clinical practice. Forty-seven percent of the responding rheumatologists stated that none of their patients complete HRQOL patient questionnaires. The majority of respondents (63%) reported that such information is "somewhat valuable." The most frequently reported reason for the underutilization was that such instruments "require too much staff time." CONCLUSIONS: The literature supports the potential value of HRQOL patient questionnaires in clinical practice. Few rheumatologists routinely gather such information as part of patient care. Reasons for this discrepancy between utility and use are given along with recommendations intended to help increase their utilization in clinical care.

Weisman MH, Paulus HE, Russak SM, Lubeck DP, Chiou CF, Sengupta N, Ofman JJ, Borenstein J, Moadel AB, Sherbourne CD, Paulus HD. · Cedars-Sinai Health System, Los Angeles, California 90048, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #12579597 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To update and complement existing instruments, we developed a multidimensional disease-specific instrument, intended to reflect the impact of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with modern treatment options on patient's Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL). METHODS: Items were developed from a systematic review of published HRQOL measures and transcripts of RA patient focus groups. Items were refined by an expert panel and administered to 350 patients for psychometric testing. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 228 potential items, and the focus group transcripts identified 96 additional items. Expert review and pilot testing resulted in an initial 58-item instrument. Twenty-six items were excluded due to floor/ceiling effects, poor response rates, or high item-item correlations. Factor analysis identified a 5-factor structure (eigenvalues >or=1). Multi-trait scaling performed on both completed surveys confirmed the 5 sub-scale structure (Cronbach's > 0.87). CONCLUSION: The CSHQ-RA consists of 33 items that address 5 HRQOL domains, each with high internal consistency. Additional testing will assess the instrument's validity and responsiveness.