1. Identifying Potential Classification Criteria for Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease: Item Generation and Item Reduction
- Author
-
Robert Terkeltaub, Hyon K. Choi, Augustin Latourte, Marwin Guitierrez, Alexander So, Janeth Yinh, Anthony M. Reginato, Lisa K. Stamp, T.L.Th.A. Jansen, Hang-Korng Ea, Mariano Andrés, Minna J. Kohler, Fabio Becce, Roberta Ramonda, Thomas Bardin, Tristan Pascart, Michael Doherty, Burak Kundakci, Georgios Filippou, Eliseo Pascual, Pascal Richette, Mark Matza, Chio Yokose, Nicola Dalbeth, Annamaria Iagnocco, Ann K. Rosenthal, Sara K. Tedeschi, Raymond P. Naden, William J. Taylor, John FitzGerald, Tuhina Neogi, Francisca Sivera, Jasvinder A. Singh, Fernando Perez-Ruiz, Geraldine M. McCarthy, Abhishek Abhishek, Frédéric Lioté, and Cattleya Godsave
- Subjects
CPPD ,calcium pyrophosphate ,classification criteria ,pseudogout ,Wrist Joint ,musculoskeletal diseases ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Crystal Arthropathies ,Knee Joint ,Steering committee ,Chondrocalcinosis ,Disease ,Calcium Pyrophosphate ,behavioral disciplines and activities ,Expert committee ,chemistry.chemical_compound ,Rheumatology ,medicine ,Humans ,business.industry ,Calcium pyrophosphate ,Rating score ,chemistry ,Item reduction ,Physical therapy ,Crystal deposition ,Item generation ,business - Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Classification criteria for calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease (CPPD) will facilitate clinical research on this common crystalline arthritis. We report on the first two phases of a four-phase process for developing CPPD classification criteria. METHODS: CPPD classification criteria development is overseen by a 12-member Steering Committee. Item generation (Phase I) included a scoping literature review of five literature databases and contributions from a 35-member Combined Expert Committee and two Patient Research Partners. Item reduction and refinement (Phase II) involved a Combined Expert Committee meeting, discussions among Clinical, Imaging, and Laboratory Advisory Groups, and an item rating exercise to assess the influence of individual items toward classification. The Steering Committee reviewed the modal rating score for each item (range -3 [strongly pushes away from CPPD] to +3 [strongly pushes toward CPPD]) to determine items to retain for future phases of criteria development. RESULTS: Item generation yielded 420 items (312 from the literature, 108 from experts/patients). The Advisory Groups eliminated items they agreed were unlikely to distinguish between CPPD and other forms of arthritis, yielding 127 items for the item rating exercise. Fifty-six items, most of which had a modal rating of +/- 2 or 3, were retained for future phases. As numerous imaging items were rated +3, the Steering Committee recommended focusing on imaging of the knee, wrist, and one additional affected joint for calcification suggestive of CPP crystal deposition. CONCLUSION: A data- and expert-driven process is underway to develop CPPD classification criteria. Candidate items comprise clinical, imaging, and laboratory features.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF