Search

Objectives Despite little evidence that analgesics are effective in inflammatory arthritis (IA), studies report substantial opioid prescribing. The extent this applies to other analgesics is uncertain. We undertook a comprehensive evaluation of analgesic prescribing in patients with IA in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum to evaluate this. Methods From 2004 to 2020, cross-sectional analyses evaluated analgesic prescription annual prevalence in RA, PsA and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), stratified by age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation and geography. Joinpoint regression evaluated temporal prescribing trends. Cohort studies determined prognostic factors at diagnosis for chronic analgesic prescriptions using Cox proportional hazards models. Results Analgesic prescribing declined over time but remained common: 2004 and 2020 IA prescription prevalence was 84.2/100 person-years (PY) (95% CI 83.9, 84.5) and 64.5/100 PY (64.2, 64.8), respectively. In 2004, NSAIDs were most prescribed (56.1/100 PY; 55.8, 56.5), falling over time. Opioids were most prescribed in 2020 (39.0/100 PY; 38.7, 39.2). Gabapentinoid prescribing increased: 2004 prevalence 1.1/100 PY (1.0, 1.2); 2020 prevalence 9.9/100 PY (9.7, 10.0). Most opioid prescriptions were chronic (2020 prevalence 23.4/100 PY [23.2, 23.6]). Non-NSAID analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA, older people, females and deprived areas/northern England. Conversely, NSAID prescribing was commoner in axSpA/males, varying little by deprivation/geography. Peri-diagnosis was high-risk for starting chronic opioid/NSAID prescriptions. Prognostic factors for chronic opioid/gabapentinoid and NSAID prescriptions differed, with NSAIDs having no consistently significant association with deprivation (unlike opioids/gabapentinoids). Conclusion IA analgesic prescribing of all classes is widespread. This is neither evidence-based nor in line with guidelines. Peri-diagnosis is an opportune moment to reduce chronic analgesic prescribing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To describe factors associated with change in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people living with gout in primary care. Methods In a UK prospective cohort study, adults with a diagnosis of gout registered with 20 general practices completed the Gout Impact Scale (GIS; scale 0–100), 36-item Short Form Physical Function subscale (PF-10; 0–100) and HAQ Disability Index (HAQ-DI; 0–3) via postal questionnaires at baseline and 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Linear mixed modelling was used to investigate factors associated with changes in HRQOL over 3 years. Results A total of 1184 participants responded at baseline (adjusted response 65.6%); 990 (83.6%) were male, with a mean age of 65.6 years (s. d. 12.5). A total of 818, 721, 696 and 605 responded at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. Factors associated with worse disease-specific and generic HRQOL over 3 years were flare frequency (five or more flares; GIS subscales, PF-10), oligo/polyarticular flares (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI), worse pain (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI), body pain (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI) and more severe depression (GIS subscales, PF-10, HAQ-DI) (P  ≤ 0.05). More severe anxiety was associated with worse disease-specific HRQOL only (GIS subscales). Older age (PF-10), being female (PF-10, HAQ-DI) and BMI (HAQ-DI) were associated with worse generic HRQOL (P  ≤ 0.05). Conclusion Gout-specific, comorbid and sociodemographic factors were associated with change in HRQOL over a 3-year period, highlighting people at risk of worse outcomes who could be targeted for interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To investigate the association between vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRD) flare. Material and methods Patients with AIRDs vaccinated against COVID-19 who consulted for disease flare between 1 December 2020 and 31 December 2021 were ascertained in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (Aurum). AIRD flare was defined as consultation for AIRD with CS prescription on the same day or the next day. Vaccination was defined using date of vaccination and product code. The observation period was partitioned into vaccine-exposed (21 days after vaccination), pre-vaccination (7 days before vaccination) and remaining vaccine-unexposed periods. Participants contributed data with multiple vaccinations and outcomes. Season adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) and 95% CI were calculated using self-controlled case series analysis. Results Data for 3554 AIRD cases, 72% female, mean age 65 years and 68.3% with RA, were included. COVID-19 vaccination was associated with significantly fewer AIRD flares in the 21-day vaccine-exposed period when all vaccinations were considered [aIRR (95% CI) 0.89 (0.80, 0.98)]. Using dose-stratified analyses there was a statistically significant negative association in the 21 days after first COVID-19 vaccination but no association after the second or third COVID-19 vaccinations [aIRR (95% CI) 0.76 (0.66, 0.89), 0.94 (0.79, 1.11) and 1.01 (0.85, 1.20), respectively]. On AIRD-type stratified analyses, vaccination was not associated with disease flares. Vaccination without or after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, and with vectored DNA or mRNA vaccines, associated with comparable reduced risk of AIRD flares in the vaccine-exposed period after first COVID-19 vaccination. Conclusions Vaccination against COVID-19 was not associated with increased AIRD flares regardless of prior COVID-19, AIRD type, and whether mRNA or DNA vaccination technology were used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives PMR causes pain, stiffness and disability in older adults. Measuring the impact of the condition from the patient's perspective is vital to high-quality research and patient-centred care, yet there are no validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for PMR. We set out to develop and psychometrically evaluate a PMR-specific PROM. Methods Two cross-sectional postal surveys of people with a confirmed diagnosis of PMR were used to provide data for field testing and psychometric evaluation. A total of 256 participants completed the draft PROM. Distribution of item responses was examined, and exploratory factor analysis and Rasch analysis were used to inform item reduction, formation of dimension structure and scoring system development. Some 179 participants completed the PROM at two time points, along with comparator questionnaires and anchor questions. Test–retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness were evaluated. Results Results from the field-testing study led to the formation of the PMR-Impact Scale (PMR-IS), comprising four domains (symptoms, function, psychological and emotional well-being, and steroid side effects). Construct validity and test–retest reliability met accepted quality criteria for each domain. There was insufficient evidence from this study to determine its ability to detect flares/deterioration, but the PMR-IS was responsive to improvements in the condition. Conclusion The PMR-IS offers researchers a new way to assess patient-reported outcomes in clinical studies of PMR. It has been developed robustly, with patient input at every stage. It has good construct validity and test–retest reliability. Further work is needed to fully establish its responsiveness and interpretability parameters, and to assess its real-world clinical utility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives International data suggest inflammatory arthritis (IA) pain management frequently involves opioid prescribing, despite little evidence of efficacy, and potential harms. We evaluated analgesic prescribing in English National Health Service-managed patients with IA. Methods Repeated cross-sectional analyses in the Consultations in Primary Care Archive (primary care consultation and prescription data in nine general practices from 2000 to 2015) evaluated the annual prevalence of analgesic prescriptions in: (i) IA cases (RA, PsA or axial spondyloarthritis [SpA]), and (ii) up to five age-, sex- and practice-matched controls. Analgesic prescriptions were classified into basic, opioids, gabapentinoids and oral NSAIDs, and sub-classified into chronic and intermittent (≥3 and 1–2 prescriptions per calendar year, respectively). Results In 2000, there were 594 cases and 2652 controls, rising to 1080 cases and 4703 controls in 2015. In all years, most (65.3–78.5%) cases received analgesics, compared with fewer (37.5–41.1%) controls. Opioid prescribing in cases fell between 2000 and 2015 but remained common with 45.4% (95% CI: 42.4%, 48.4%) and 32.9% (95% CI: 29.8%, 36.0%) receiving at least 1 and ≥3 opioid prescriptions, respectively, in 2015. Gabapentinoid prescription prevalence in cases increased from 0% in 2000 to 9.5% (95% CI: 7.9%, 11.4%) in 2015, and oral NSAID prescription prevalence fell from 53.7% (95% CI: 49.6%, 57.8%) in 2000 to 25.0% (95% CI: 22.4%, 27.7%) in 2015. Across years, analgesic prescribing was commoner in RA than PsA/axial SpA, and 1.7–2.0 times higher in cases than controls. Conclusions Analgesic prescribing in IA is common. This is at variance with existing evidence of analgesic efficacy and risks, and guidelines. Interventions are needed to improve analgesic prescribing in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives There is increasing interest in prediction and prevention of RA. It is important to understand the views of those at risk to inform the development of effective approaches. First-degree relatives (FDRs) of RA patients are at increased risk of RA. This study assessed predictors of their interest in predictive testing for RA. Methods Questionnaires were completed by RA patients (provided with their questionnaire by a healthcare professional) and their FDRs (provided with their questionnaire by their RA proband). FDR surveys assessed interest in taking a predictive test, demographic variables, perceived RA risk, attitudes about predictive testing, autonomy preferences, illness perceptions, avoidance coping and health anxiety. Patient surveys included demographic variables, disease impact, RA duration and treatment. Ordinal logistic regression examined the association between FDRs' characteristics and their interest in predictive testing. Generalized estimating equations assessed associations between patient characteristics and FDRs' interest in predictive testing. Results Three hundred and ninety-six FDRs responded. Paired data from the RA proband were available for 292. The proportion of FDRs interested in predictive testing was 91.3%. Information-seeking preferences, beliefs that predictive testing can increase empowerment over health and positive attitudes about risk knowledge were associated with increased interest. Beliefs that predictive testing could cause psychological harm predicted lower interest. Patient characteristics of the proband were not associated with FDRs' interest. Conclusions FDRs' interest in predictive testing for RA was high, and factors associated with interest were identified. These findings will inform the development of predictive strategies and informational resources for those at risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To develop and validate a prognostic model for LEF discontinuation with abnormal blood test results. Methods Data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold and Aurum were used for model development and external validation, respectively. Participants prescribed LEF between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2019 were followed up from 6 months after the first general practitioner prescription to the earliest of date of outcome, death, 5 year follow-up or 31 December 2019. Candidate prognostic factors were ascertained using theory and data-driven approaches. Penalized Cox regression was performed to develop the risk equation, followed by internal validation using 500 bootstraps to correct for optimism. Multiple imputation was applied to handle missing data. Model performance was assessed in terms of calibration and discrimination. Results Data for 1487 and 2329 participants contributing 3140 and 5246 person-years follow-up were included in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. Thirteen candidate predictors were included in the model. Epilepsy and either cytopenia or elevated liver enzymes during the first 6 months of shared-care LEF prescription were strong predictors of drug discontinuation with a hazard ratio of 4.39 (95% CI 1.74, 11.06) and 3.06 (2.15, 4.35), respectively. The unadjusted and optimism-adjusted calibration slope in development data was 1.00 (95% CI 0.75, 1.25) and 0.72 (95% CI 0.47, 0.97), respectively. The calibration slope in validation data was 0.91 (95% CI 0.74, 1.07). The model showed prognostic separation with an optimism-adjusted Royston D statistic of 0.73 (95% CI 0.44, 1.02). Conclusion We have developed and externally validated an easy-to-use prognostic model that may be used to risk stratify monitoring for LEF toxicity and to make informed choices about risks when choosing treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To examine the association between β-blocker prescription and first primary-care consultation for knee OA, hip OA, knee pain and hip pain. Methods Data source: Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Participants aged ≥40 years in receipt of new oral β-blocker prescriptions were propensity score (PS) matched to an unexposed control. Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were calculated, and adjusted for non-osteoporotic fractures, number of primary-care consultations for knee or hip injury, and, the number of primary-care consultations, out-patient referrals and hospitalizations in the 12 months preceding cohort entry. Analysis was stratified according to β-blocker class and for commonly prescribed drugs. P  < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results A total of 111 718 β-blocker–exposed participants were 1:1 PS matched to unexposed controls. β-blocker prescription was associated with reduced cumulative risk of knee OA, knee pain, and hip pain consultations [with a HR (95% CI) of 0.90 (0.83, 0.98), 0.88 (0.83, 0.92) and 0.85 (0.79, 0.90), respectively]. Propranolol and atenolol were associated with a lower incidence of knee OA and knee pain consultations with a HR of between 0.78 and 0.91. β-blockers were associated with reduced incidence of consultation for large-joint lower-limb OA/pain as a composite outcome, defined as the earliest of knee OA, knee pain, hip OA or a hip pain consultation [with a HR (95% CI) of 0.87 (0.84, 0.90)]. Conclusion Commonly used β-blockers have analgesic properties for musculoskeletal pain. Atenolol might be a therapeutic option for OA and cardiovascular co-morbidities in which β-blockers are indicated, while propranolol may be suitable for people with co-morbid anxiety. A confirmatory randomized controlled trial is needed before clinical practice is changed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]