| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Nijs, Jo, et al.
(author)
-
Nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic low back pain? : The low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium's international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations
- 2024
-
In: The Lancet Rheumatology. - : Elsevier. - 2665-9913. ; 6:3, s. e178-e188
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The potential to classify low back pain as being characterised by dominant nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic mechanisms is a clinically relevant issue. Preliminary evidence suggests that these low back pain phenotypes might respond differently to treatments; however, more research must be done before making specific recommendations. Accordingly, the low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium was established as a group of 36 clinicians and researchers from 13 countries (five continents) and 29 institutions, to apply a modified Nominal Group Technique methodology to develop international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations to provide guidance for identifying the dominant pain phenotype in patients with low back pain, and potentially adapt pain management strategies. The BACPAP consortium's recommendations are also intended to provide direction for future clinical research by building on the established clinical criteria for neuropathic and nociplastic pain. The BACPAP consortium's consensus recommendations are a necessary early step in the process to determine if personalised pain medicine based on pain phenotypes is feasible for low back pain management. Therefore, these recommendations are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice until additional evidence is generated that is specific to these low back pain phenotypes.
|
|
| 3. |
- Labie, Celine, et al.
(author)
-
Integration of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia in Best-Practice Care for Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis and Insomnia: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol
- 2024
-
In: PHYSICAL THERAPY. - 0031-9023 .- 1538-6724. ; 104:4
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common musculoskeletal problem worldwide and its key symptom is pain. Guidelines recommend incorporating comorbidity-specific therapies into patient-centered care. Patients diagnosed with KOA frequently have insomnia, which is associated with higher-pain severity. For this reason, this study protocol outlines the methodology of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTi) combined with best-practice KOA care (BPC) compared to best-practice KOA care and lifestyle education.Methods A 2-arm RCT in patients with KOA and insomnia is conducted, in which a total of 128 patients are randomly allocated to an intervention or control group. The experimental intervention consists of 12 sessions of physical therapist-led BPC with an additional 6 sessions of CBTi. The control intervention also receives BPC, which is supplemented with 6 general lifestyle information sessions. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in change in pain severity at 6 months after intervention. Secondary outcomes are pain-related outcomes, sleep-related outcomes, symptoms of anxiety and depression, level of physical activity and function, perceived global improvement, biomarkers of inflammation, and health-related quality of life. Assessments are conducted at baseline, immediately after intervention, and 3, 6, and 12 months after intervention. Furthermore, a cost-utility analysis for the proposed intervention will be performed alongside the RCT.Impact This is the first RCT investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a physical therapist-led intervention integrating CBTi into BPC in patients with KOA and insomnia. The results of this trial will add to the growing body of evidence on the effectiveness of individualized and comorbidity-specific KOA care, which can inform clinical decision-making and assist policymakers and other relevant stakeholders in optimizing the care pathway for patients with KOA.
|
|
| 4. |
- Arat, Seher, et al.
(author)
-
Diverging illness perceptions between physicians about patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic sclerosis: a vignette-based study.
- 2017
-
In: Rheumatology international. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1437-160X .- 0172-8172. ; 37:6, s. 915-922
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and systemic sclerosis (SSc) are complex chronic auto-immune diseases characterized by multiple organ involvement, comorbidities, and complications. This complexity results in a need for a multidisciplinary management and treatment of SLE and SSc by physicians from a number of medical disciplines, all of who may have different perceptions concerning the condition of a particular patient. The aim of this study was to explore differences in physicians' perceptions on the illness of SLE and SSc patients. Physicians from nine disciplines working at three hospitals in Belgium completed illness perception questionnaires for healthcare professionals based on four patient vignettes, i.e., two vignettes per disease (SLE-SSc). Statistical analysis was carried out by a k-means clustering technique for clustering physicians according to their illness perceptions. Fifty physicians, 62% men with a mean age of 42.8 years (SD 11.3) and mean working experience of 12.7 years (SD 11.6), participated. For each disease, three clusters of physicians with different scores in illness perceptions were identified. For SLE, these clusters were specified as the 'optimistic' group, the 'realistic' group, and the 'overwhelming impact by disease' group. For SSc, the clusters were characterized as the 'optimistic' group, the 'realistic' group, and the 'skeptical' group. We found divergent illness perceptions across physicians of the same and other disciplines. Our study yielded three clusters of physicians per disease with a large variability in illness perceptions. Further studies should focus on the factors that determine these differences and their consequences for patient care.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Kristensen, Lars Erik, et al.
(author)
-
Ixekizumab Demonstrates Consistent Efficacy Versus Adalimumab in Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drug-Naïve Psoriatic Arthritis Patients Regardless of Psoriasis Severity : 52-Week Post Hoc Results from SPIRIT-H2H
- 2022
-
In: Rheumatology and Therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2198-6576 .- 2198-6584. ; 9:1, s. 109-125
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction: Ixekizumab, a selective interleukin-17A antagonist, was compared with adalimumab in the SPIRIT-H2H study (NCT03151551) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and concomitant psoriasis. This post hoc analysis reports outcomes to week 52 in patients from SPIRIT-H2H, stratified by baseline psoriasis severity. Methods: SPIRIT-H2H was a 52-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, rater-blinded, parallel-group study of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients (N = 566) with PsA and active psoriasis (≥ 3% body surface area involvement). Patients were randomized to ixekizumab or adalimumab (1:1) with stratification by baseline concomitant use of conventional synthetic DMARDs and psoriasis severity (with/without moderate-to-severe psoriasis). Patients received on-label dosing according to psoriasis severity. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients simultaneously achieving ≥ 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR50) and 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI100) at week 24. Secondary endpoints included musculoskeletal, disease activity (defined by composite indices), skin and nail, quality of life and safety outcomes. In this post hoc analysis, primary and secondary endpoints of SPIRIT-H2H were analyzed by baseline psoriasis severity. Results: A greater proportion of patients achieved the combined endpoint of ACR50 + PASI100 and PASI100 with ixekizumab compared with adalimumab at weeks 24 and 52, regardless of baseline psoriasis severity. ACR response rates were similar for ixekizumab and adalimumab across both patient subgroups. For musculoskeletal outcomes, similar efficacy was seen for ixekizumab and adalimumab, but ixekizumab showed greater responses for skin outcomes regardless of psoriasis severity. The safety profiles of ixekizumab and adalimumab were consistent between subgroups. Conclusions: Regardless of baseline psoriasis severity, ixekizumab demonstrated greater efficacy than adalimumab with respect to simultaneous achievement of ACR50 + PASI100, and showed consistent and sustained efficacy across PsA-related domains. It also demonstrated higher response rates for skin outcomes. These subgroup analyses highlight the efficacy of ixekizumab in patients with PsA irrespective of the severity of concomitant psoriasis.
|
|
