SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Bijlsma J. W. J.) "

Sökning: WFRF:(Bijlsma J. W. J.)

  • Resultat 1-10 av 18
  • [1]2Nästa
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  •  
2.
  • Hoes, J. N., et al. (författare)
  • EULAR evidence-based recommendations on the management of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatic diseases
  • 2007
  • Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - British Medical Association. - 1468-2060. ; 66:12, s. 1560-1567
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Objective: To develop evidence-based recommendations for the management of systemic glucocorticoid ( GC) therapy in rheumatic diseases. Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline development group from 11 European countries, Canada and the USA consisted of 15 rheumatologists, 1 internist, 1 rheumatologist-epidemiologist, 1 health professional, 1 patient and 1 research fellow. The Delphi method was used to agree on 10 key propositions related to the safe use of GCs. A systematic literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library was then used to identify the best available research evidence to support each of the 10 propositions. The strength of recommendation was given according to research evidence, clinical expertise and perceived patient preference. Results: The 10 propositions were generated through three Delphi rounds and included patient education, risk factors, adverse effects, concomitant therapy ( ie, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gastroprotection and cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, calcium and vitamin D, bisphosphonates) and special safety advice ( ie, adrenal insufficiency, pregnancy, growth impairment). Conclusion: Ten key recommendations for the management of systemic GC-therapy were formulated using a combination of systematically retrieved research evidence and expert consensus. There are areas of importance that have little evidence ( ie, dosing and tapering strategies, timing, risk factors and monitoring for adverse effects, perioperative GC-replacement) and need further research; therefore also a research agenda was composed.
  •  
3.
  • Zhang, W., et al. (författare)
  • EULAR evidence based recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis: report of a task force of the EULAR standing committee for international clinical studies including therapeutics (ESCISIT)
  • 2007
  • Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - British Medical Association. - 1468-2060. ; 66:3, s. 377-388
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Objectives: To develop evidence based recommendations for the management of hand osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 16 rheumatologists, one physiatrist, one orthopaedic surgeon, two allied health professionals, and one evidence based medicine expert, representing 15 different European countries. Each participant contributed up to 10 propositions describing key clinical points for management of hand OA. Final recommendations were agreed using a Delphi consensus approach. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Science Citation Index, AMED, Cochrane Library, HTA, and NICE reports was used to identify the best available research evidence to support each proposition. Where possible, the effect size and number needed to treat were calculated for efficacy. Relative risk or odds ratio was estimated for safety, and incremental cost effectiveness ratio was used for cost effectiveness. The strength of recommendation was provided according to research evidence, clinical expertise, and perceived patient preference. Results: Eleven key propositions involving 17 treatment modalities were generated through three Delphi rounds. Treatment topics included general considerations (for example, clinical features, risk factors, comorbidities), non-pharmacological (for example, education plus exercise, local heat, and splint), pharmacological (for example, paracetamol, NSAIDs, NSAIDs plus gastroprotective agents, COX-2 inhibitors, systemic slow acting disease modifying drugs, intra-articular corticosteroids), and surgery. Of 17 treatment modalities, only six were supported by research evidence (education plus exercise, NSAIDs, COX-2 inhibitors, topical NSAIDs, topical capsaicin, and chondroitin sulphate). Others were supported either by evidence extrapolated from studies of OA affecting other joint sites or by expert opinion. Strength of recommendation varied according to level of evidence, benefits and harms/costs of the treatment, and clinical expertise. Conclusion: Eleven key recommendations for treatment of hand OA were developed using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. The evidence was evaluated and the strength of recommendation was provided.
  •  
4.
  •  
5.
  • Zhang, W., et al. (författare)
  • EULAR evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of hand osteoarthritis: report of a task force of ESCISIT
  • 2009
  • Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - British Medical Association. - 1468-2060. ; 68:1, s. 8-17
  • Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Objectives: To develop evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of hand osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline development group, representing 15 European countries, generated 10 key propositions regarding diagnosis using a Delphi consensus approach. For each recommendation, research evidence was searched for systematically. Whenever possible, the sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio (LR) were calculated; relative risk and odds ratios were estimated for risk factors for hand OA. Quality of evidence was categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) hierarchy, and strength of recommendation was assessed by the EULAR visual analogue scale. Results: Diagnostic topics included clinical manifestations, radiographic features, subgroups, differential diagnosis, laboratory tests, risk factors and comorbidities. The sensitivity, specificity and LR varied between tests depending upon the cut-off level, gold standard and controls. Overall, no single test could be used to define hand OA on its own (LR,10) but a composite of the tests greatly increased the chance of the diagnosis. The probability of a subject having hand OA was 20% when Heberden nodes alone were present, but this increased to 88% when in addition the subject was over 40 years old, had a family history of nodes and had joint space narrowing in any finger joint. Conclusion: Ten key recommendations for diagnosis of hand OA were developed using research evidence and expert consensus. Diagnosis of hand OA should be based on assessment of a composite of features.
  •  
6.
  •  
7.
  •  
8.
  • Jansen, Nathalie W. D., et al. (författare)
  • The Combination of the Biomarkers Urinary C-Terminal Telopeptide of Type II Collagen, Serum Cartilage Oligomeric Matrix Protein, and Serum Chondroitin Sulfate 846 Reflects Cartilage Damage in Hemophilic Arthropathy
  • 2009
  • Ingår i: Arthritis and Rheumatism. - John Wiley and Sons Inc.. - 1529-0131. ; 60:1, s. 290-298
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Objective. Hemophilic arthropathy, with characteristics of inflammatory (rheumatoid arthritis) and degenerative (osteoarthritis) joint damage, occurs at an early age, is associated with minor comorbidity, and is restricted to 3 pairs of large joints. The aim of this study was to determine whether commonly used serum and/or urinary biomarkers of cartilage and bone turnover for which assay kits are commercially available are associated with the severity of joint damage in patients with various degrees of hemophilic arthropathy and, thus, whether this disease could be useful in the identification and evaluation of such biomarkers. Methods. Blood and urine samples were collected from 36 patients with various degrees of hemophilic arthropathy. Commercially available assays for the most frequently investigated serum and urine biomarkers were performed: urinary C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX-I), urinary CTX-II, serum CTX-I, serum CTX-II, serum cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP), serum cartilage cleavage products C1,2C and C2C, and serum chondroitin sulfate 846 (CS-846). Radiographs of the ankles, knees, and elbows in all patients were evaluated for the degree of joint damage according to the Pettersson score, which is based on cartilage and periarticular bone changes and is specific for hemophilic arthropathy. Results. Urinary CTX-II, serum C1,2C, and serum CS-846 levels correlated with the overall Pettersson score and with the joint space narrowing component. Regression analysis showed that combined indexes of different markers increased the degree of correlation for the combination of urinary CTX-II, serum COMP, and serum CS-846. Bone-specific markers (urinary/serum CTX-I and serum C1,2C) did not correlate with specific bone-related items of the Pettersson score (osteoporosis and erosions). Conclusion. These results support the idea that a combination of biomarkers relates significantly better to the severity of joint damage than do individual biomarkers. The combination of urinary CTX-II, serum COMP, and serum CS-846 correlated best with the degree of arthropathy. Because of its specific characteristics and restricted involvement, hemophilic arthropathy may prove useful in the screening of newly developed biomarkers of joint damage.
  •  
9.
  • Pendleton, A., et al. (författare)
  • EULAR recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis : Report of a task force of the standing committee for international clinical studies including therapeutic trials (ESCISIT)
  • 2000
  • Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - British Medical Association. - 0003-4967. ; 59:12, s. 44-936
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Background - Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease encountered throughout Europe. A task force for the EULAR Standing Committee for Clinical Trials met in 1998 to determine the methodological and logistical approach required for the development of evidence based guidelines for treatment of knee OA. The guidelines were restricted to cover all currently available treatments for knee OA diagnosed either clinically and/or radiographically affecting any compartment of the knee. Methods - The first stage was the selection of treatment modalities to be considered. The second stage comprised a search of the electronic databases Medline and Embase using a combination of subject headings and keywords. All European language publications in the form of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, controlled trials, and observational studies were included. During stage three all the relevant studies were quality scored. The summary statistics for validated outcome measures, when available, were recorded and, where practical, the numbers needed to treat and the effect size for each treatment were calculated. In the fourth stage key clinical propositions were determined by expert consensus employing a Delphi approach. The final stage ranked these propositions according to the available evidence. A second set of propositions relating to a future research agenda was determined by expert consensus using a Delphi approach. Results - Over 2400 English language publications and 400 non-English language publications were identified. Seven hundred and forty four studies presented outcome data of the effects of specific treatments on knee OA. Quantitative analysis of treatment effect was possible in only 61 studies. Recommendations for the management of knee OA based on currently available data and expert opinion are presented. Proposals for a future research agenda are highlighted. Conclusions - These are the first clinical guidelines on knee OA to combine an evidence based approach and a consensus approach across a wide range of treatment modalities. It is apparent that certain clinical propositions are supported by substantial research based evidence, while others are not. There is thus an urgent need for future well designed trials to consider key clinical questions.
  •  
10.
  • Pendleton, A., et al. (författare)
  • EULAR-Richtlinien für die Behandlung von Kniegelenksarthrose : Bericht der Arbeitsgruppe des Standing Committees for International Clinical Studies Including Therapeutic Trials (ESCISIT)
  • 2003
  • Ingår i: Journal fur Mineralstoffwechsel. - Krause und Pachernegg GmbH. - 1023-7763. ; 10:3, s. 23-31
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease encountered throughout Europe. A task force for the EULAR Standing Committee for Clinical Trials met in 1998 to determine the methodological and logistical approach required for the development of evidence based guidelines for treatment of knee OA. The guidelines were restricted to cover all currently available treatments for knee OA diagnosed either clinically and/or radiographically affecting any compartment of the knee. Methods: The first stage was the selection of treatment modalities to be considered. The second stage comprised a search of the electronic databases Medline and Embase using a combination of subject headings and keywords. All European language publications in the form of systematic reviews, metaanalyses, randomised controlled trials, controlled trials, and observational studies were included. During stage three all the relevant studies were quality scored. The summary statistics for validated outcome measures, when available, were recorded and, where practical, the numbers needed to treat and the effect size for each treatment were calculated. In the fourth stage key clinical propositions were determined by expert consensus employing a Delphi approach. The final stage ranked these propositions according to the available evidence. A second set of propositions relating to a future research agenda was determined by expert consensus using a Delphi approach. Results: Over 2400 English language publications and 400 non-English language publications were identified. Seven hundred and forty four studies presented outcome data of the eVects of specific treatments on knee OA. Quantitative analysis of treatment effect was possible in only 61 studies. Recommendations for the management of knee OA based on currently available data and expert opinion are presented. Proposals for a future research agenda are highlighted. Conclusions: These are the first clinical guidelines on knee OA to combine an evidence based approach and a consensus approach across a wide range of treatment modalities. It is apparent that certain clinical propositions are supported by substantial research based evidence, while others are not. There is thus an urgent need for future well designed trials to consider key clinical questions.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-10 av 18
  • [1]2Nästa
 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy