Replacement Arthroplasty: Punzi L

Zhang W, Doherty M, Arden N, Bannwarth B, Bijlsma J, Gunther KP, Hauselmann HJ, Herrero-Beaumont G, Jordan K, Kaklamanis P, Leeb B, Lequesne M, Lohmander S, Mazieres B, Martin-Mola E, Pavelka K, Pendleton A, Punzi L, Swoboda B, Varatojo R, Verbruggen G, Zimmermann-Gorska I, Dougados M, Anonymous00408. · Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, UK. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #15471891 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 18 rheumatologists, 4 orthopaedic surgeons, and 1 epidemiologist, representing 14 European countries. Each participant contributed up to 10 propositions describing key clinical aspects of hip OA management. Ten final recommendations were agreed using a Delphi consensus approach. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and HTA reports were searched systematically to obtain research evidence for each proposition. Where possible, outcome data for efficacy, adverse effects, and cost effectiveness were abstracted. Effect size, rate ratio, number needed to treat, and incremental cost effectiveness ratio were calculated. The quality of evidence was categorised according to the evidence hierarchy. The strength of recommendation was assessed using the traditional A-D grading scale and a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: Ten key treatment propositions were generated through three Delphi rounds. They included 21 interventions, such as paracetamol, NSAIDs, symptomatic slow acting disease modifying drugs, opioids, intra-articular steroids, non-pharmacological treatment, total hip replacement, osteotomy, and two general propositions. 461 studies were identified from the literature search for the proposed interventions of efficacy, side effects, and cost effectiveness. Research evidence supported 15 interventions in the treatment of hip OA. Evidence specific for the hip was strikingly lacking. Strength of recommendation varied according to category of research evidence and expert opinion. CONCLUSION: Ten key recommendations for the treatment of hip OA were developed based on research evidence and expert consensus. The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of these recommendations were evaluated and the strength of recommendation was scored.

Punzi L, Canesi B, Carrabba M, Cimmino MA, Frizziero L, Lapadula G, Arioli G, Chevallard M, Cozzi F, Cricelli C, Fioravanti A, Giannini S, Iannone F, Leardini G, Mannoni A, Meliconi R, Modena V, Molfetta L, Monteleone V, Nava T, Parente L, Paresce E, Patrignani P, Ramonda R, Salaffi F, Spadaro A, Marcolongo R. · Cattedra ed UOC di Reumatologia, Università di Padova, Padova. · Reumatismo. · Pubmed #15470525 links to  free full text

Abstract: The recommendations for the management of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee firstly proposed by the EULAR in 2000, have been updated in 2003. One of the most important objectives of the expert charged to provide these recommendations was their dissemination. Thus, the information generated may be used by each individual country to produce their own set of management guidelines and algorithms for treatment in primary care. The Italian Society of Rheumatology (SIR) and the Italian League against Rheumatism (LIMAR) have organised a Consensus on the EULAR recommendations 2003 with the aim to analyse their acceptability and applicability according to our own experience and local situations in the Italy. The results of this Consensus have demonstrated that a large majority of the EULAR recommendations are endorsed by the Italian experts. Furthermore, the final document of the Italian Consensus clearly indicated the need that specialists involved in the management of knee OA strongly encourage the dissemination of the EULAR 2003 recommendations also in Italy.

Jordan KM, Arden NK, Doherty M, Bannwarth B, Bijlsma JW, Dieppe P, Gunther K, Hauselmann H, Herrero-Beaumont G, Kaklamanis P, Lohmander S, Leeb B, Lequesne M, Mazieres B, Martin-Mola E, Pavelka K, Pendleton A, Punzi L, Serni U, Swoboda B, Verbruggen G, Zimmerman-Gorska I, Dougados M, Anonymous00160. · Southampton General Hospital, Southampton S016 6YD, UK. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #14644851 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To update the EULAR recommendations for management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) by an evidence based medicine and expert opinion approach. METHODS: The literature search and guidelines were restricted to treatments for knee OA pertaining to clinical and/or radiological OA of any compartment of the knee. Papers for combined treatment of knee and other types of OA were excluded. Medline and Embase were searched using a combination of subject headings and key words. Searches for those treatments previously investigated were conducted for January 1999 to February 2002 and for those treatments not previously investigated for 1966 to February 2002. The level of evidence found for each treatment was documented. Quality scores were determined for each paper, an effect size comparing the treatment with placebo was calculated, where possible, and a toxicity profile was determined for each treatment modality. RESULTS: 497 new publications were identified by the search. Of these, 103 were intervention trials and included in the overall analysis, and 33 treatment modalities were identified. Previously identified publications which were not exclusively knee OA in the initial analysis were rejected. In total, 545 publications were included. Based on the results of the literature search and expert opinion, 10 recommendations for the treatment of knee OA were devised using a five stage Delphi technique. Based on expert opinion, a further set of 10 items was identified by a five stage Delphi technique as important for future research. CONCLUSION: The updated recommendations support some of the previous propositions published in 2000 but also include modified statements and new propositions. Although a large number of treatment options for knee OA exist, the evidence based format of the EULAR Recommendations continues to identify key clinical questions that currently are unanswered.