Search

ObjectivesTo investigate whether delirium motor subtypes differ in terms of phenomenology and contributory aetiology.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingInternational study incorporating data from Ireland and India across palliative care, old age liaison psychiatry and general adult liaison psychiatry settings.Participants1757 patients diagnosed with delirium using criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth edition (DSM IV).Primary and secondary outcome measuresHyperactive, mixed and hypoactive delirium subtypes were identified using the abbreviated version of the Delirium Motor Subtype Scale. Phenomenology was assessed using the Delirium Rating Scale Revised. Contributory aetiologies were assessed using the Delirium Aetiology Checklist (DEC), with a score >2 indicating that the aetiology was likely or definitely contributory.ResultsHypoactive delirium was associated with dementia, cerebrovascular and systemic infection aetiologies (pConclusionsThis study indicates a pattern of aetiology and symptomatology of delirium motor subtypes across a large international sample that had previously been lacking. It serves to improve our understanding of this complex condition and has implications in terms of early detection and management of delirium.

What you need to know Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic, disabling autoimmune disease characterised by synovitis of small and large joints causing swelling, stiffness, pain, and progressive joint destruction. About 1% of the UK population have rheumatoid arthritis, and approximately 15% of these people have severe disease. It affects roughly three times as many women as men. People tend to develop rheumatoid arthritis between 40 and 60 years of age, although it can arise at any age. The early signs of rheumatoid arthritis are often encountered in primary care, where people present with joint pain and swelling. Fast and accurate referral to rheumatology services is important to achieve early remission and prevent or reduce disability.1 This article summarises the update of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline for the diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis in adults.2 The management of rheumatoid arthritis has evolved in the nine years since the previous NICE guideline on rheumatoid arthritis was published, with greater emphasis on a treat-to-target strategy rather than specific drug regimens,3 and debate about the merit of initiating treatment with combination drug therapy.4 Technologies such as ultrasound have been increasingly used for diagnosis and monitoring of synovitis where it is unclear from clinical examination.5 These aspects of management were investigated by the Guideline Committee, and …

The recognition of the primacy of enthesitis in animal models of spondyloarthritis and the prevalence of clinically occult enthesopathy in psoriatic subjects and of persistent joint pain in PsA subjects who have ostensibly good reduction of joint swelling under biological therapy has highlighted the potential impact of polyenthesitis in psoriatic disease. In daily practice, the formal demonstration of enthesitis is challenging for the following reasons: the relatively avascular nature of enthesis, often leading to the absence of overt clinical inflammatory signs; the frequent lack of elevation of inflammatory markers; and finally, the limitations of current imaging techniques to provide supportive evidence for inflammation in these areas. Consequently, enthesitis may present as widespread pain indistinguishable from FM or may emerge as the dominant feature after successful biological therapy for suppression of synovitis. The unmet needs in the differentiation between FM and enthesitis in psoriatic disease patients are highlighted and critically evaluated in this article.

The automation and systemisation of the next generation of cognitive assessment approaches have the potential to change how clinicians assess and interact with patients. This may be especially pertinent in the case of delirium, as current methods often rely on the subjective opinion of clinicians and specialists, with potential for the condition to be overlooked or misdiagnosed. Currently, one of the most commonly used tests, is the clock-drawing test, which has relatively wide appeal as a cognitive screening instrument due to its clinical utility and psychometric properties. However, there are a number of inconsistencies associated with its use and interpretation. In this paper, we describe a new assessment methodology that we have developed, facilitated by the advances in tablet technology. In trials, our "Letter and Shape Drawing (LSD)" tool, involving both an automated scoring capability and a simpler user interaction, has demonstrated correlation with other conventional cognitive test methods although some optimisation requirements remain.

© 2017 European Sleep Research Society While research indicates that both the macro- and microstructure of sleep may be altered in fibromyalgia syndrome, few studies have controlled for symptom duration or included pain-control participants (i.e. patients with chronic pain and sleep disturbance not associated with fibromyalgia syndrome). A frequently reported alteration found in the sleep microstructure of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome is the alpha-delta sleep anomaly. Although alpha waves have been observed during N3 sleep in healthy individuals, it has been proposed that there is an increase in alpha wave activity during slow-wave sleep in fibromyalgia syndrome. Originally considered a possible neurological contribution to fibromyalgia syndrome, whether the alpha-delta sleep anomaly is fundamental to the development of fibromyalgia syndrome, or results mainly from the pain experience remains unknown. The present study was designed to compare sleep macro- and microstructure, and psychometric profiles, in three broadly age-matched groups of female participants: patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (n = 19); patients with osteoar thritis with sleep disturbance (n = 17); and healthy adults (n = 10). Patients with fibromyalgia syndrome met the American College of Rheumatology diagnostic criteria and were recruited within 6 months of diagnosis. Subjective sleep quality was significantly lowest, and levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms were significantly highest for patients with fibromyalgia syndrome. However, the groups showed no significant differences in polysomnographic measures of total sleep time, sleep latency and total wake after sleep onset. Levels of alpha-delta sleep were statistically similar in both clinical (fibromyalgia syndrome and osteoarthritis) groups, indicating that it is not a specific abnormality of fibromyalgia syndrome. Overall, subjective measurements of anxiety, depression, fatigue and sleep quality better discriminated between the three groups than did objective measurements of sleep variables.

Conventional bedside tests of visuospatial function such as the Clock Drawing (CDT) and Intersecting Pentagons (IPT) lack consistency in delivery and interpretation. We compared performance on a novel test of visuospatial ability - the LSD - with the IPT, CDT and MMSE in 180 acute elderly medical inpatients [mean age 79.7±7.1 (range 62-96); 91 females (50.6%)]. 124 (69%) scored ≤23 on the MMSE; 60 with mild (score 18-23) and 64 with severe (score ≤17) impairment. 78 (43%) scored ≥6 on the CDT, while for the IPT, 87 (47%) scored ≥4. The CDT and IPT agreed on the classification of 138 patients (77%) with modest-strong agreement with the MMSE categories. Correlation between the LSD and visuospatial tests was high. A four-item version of the LSD incorporating items 1,10,12,15 had high correlation with the LSD-15 and strong association with MMSE categories. The LSD-4 provides a brief and easily interpreted bedside test of visuospatial function that has high coverage of elderly patients with neurocognitive impairment, good agreement with conventional tests of visuospatial ability and favourable ability to identify significant cognitive impairment. [181 words].

Objective. Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is known to be effective as monotherapy at a dosage of 400 mg every 4 weeks in patients with active RA who have failed DMARDs. The aim of this study was to investigate every 4-week CZP in addition to continued MTX therapy in patients with an inadequate response to MTX alone. Methods. Patients with active RA with inadequate response to MTX, on background MTX, were randomized to double-blind treatment with CZP 400 mg or placebo every 4 weeks for 24 weeks (NCT00544154). The primary efficacy end-point was the ACR 20% improvement criteria (ACR20) response rate at Week 24. Other end-points included ACR50 and ACR70 response rates, ACR core components, 28-joint DAS (ESR) with three variables (DAS28-3) and health-related quality-of-life outcomes in addition to safety. Results. Of 247 randomized patients, 126 received CZP and 121 received placebo, in addition to MTX. ACR20 response rates were 45.9 vs 22.9%, respectively [P < 0.001 analysed by the Cochran MantelHaenszel (CMH) method], with improvements being apparent from Week 1. Statistically significant improvements over placebo were seen with CZP for ACR50, ACR core components, DAS28-3 and physical functioning. Rates of treatment-related adverse events were similar between groups (25.0 vs 27.7%), and there were no deaths or serious opportunistic infections. Conclusion. CZP 400 mg every 4 weeks plus MTX demonstrated a favourable riskbenefit profile with rapid onset of action in RA patients with an inadequate response to an earlier MTX therapy.

Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who previously discontinued tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists for any reason in clinical practice. Methods. ReAct (Research in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis) was a large, open-label trial that enrolled adults with active RA who had previously been treated with traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs or biological response modifiers. Patients selfadministered adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week for 12 weeks and were allowed to enter an optional long-term extension phase. Measures of adalimumab effectiveness included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria, Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ DI). Results. Of 6610 patients, 899 had a history of etanercept and/or infliximab therapy; these patients experienced substantial clinical benefit from adalimumab treatment. At week 12, 60% of patients had an ACR20 and 33% had an ACR50 response; 76% had a moderate and 23% had a good EULAR response. In addition, 12% achieved a DAS28 < 2.6, indicating clinical remission, and 13% achieved a HAQ DI score < 0.5. The allergic adverse event rate, regardless of relationship to adalimumab, was 6.5/100-patient-years (PYs) in previously TNF antagonist-exposed patients and 4.3/100-PYs in TNF antagonist naive patients. A multiple regression analysis indicated no statistically significantly increased risk of serious infections in patients who received prior TNF antagonists compared with TNF antagonist naive patients. Conclusion. In typical clinical practice, adalimumab was effective and well-tolerated in patients with RA previously treated with etanercept and/or infliximab.

Objective Although common treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) pain, such as nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), simple analgesics, and weak opioids, provide relief in some cases, they fail to control pain or are poorly tolerated in many cases. Strong opioids have been used to successfully treat several types of noncancer pain but have rarely been tested in controlled studies. Therefore, we tested the effects of transdermal fentanyl (TDF) in patients with moderate-to-severe OA pain, in a placebo-controlled study. Methods The cohort comprised patients with radiologically confirmed OA of the hip or knee (meeting the American College of Rheumatology criteria) requiring joint replacement and with moderate-to-severe pain that had been inadequately controlled by weak opioids. The patients were randomized to receive TDF or placebo for 6 weeks after a 1-week pretreatment run-in phase. During study treatment, previously prescribed NSAIDs and simple analgesics were continued, but weak opioids were discontinued. All patients had access to paracetamol and metoclopramide. Pain was recorded on a visual analog scale (VAS), and function was assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Results Data were available for 399 patients (202 receiving TDF, 197 receiving placebo), of whom 199 (50%) completed the study. TDF provided significantly better pain relief than placebo, as demonstrated by the primary outcome measure (area under the curve for VAS scores −20 in the TDF group versus −14.6 in the placebo group; P = 0.007). TDF was also associated with significantly better overall WOMAC scores and pain scores. The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and somnolence, and these occurred more often in the TDF group. Conclusion TDF can reduce pain and improve function in patients with knee or hip OA.

Objective To compare the efficacy of the cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2)–specific inhibitors celecoxib and rofecoxib in treating the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis (OA). Methods In this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study, 475 patients with OA of the knee received either celecoxib 200 mg/day (n = 189), rofecoxib 25 mg/day (n = 190), or placebo (n = 96) for 6 weeks. Arthritis assessments were performed at baseline, week 3, and week 6 (or at the time of early termination). Results In primary measures of efficacy (OA pain score on a 100-mm visual analog scale [VAS] and total domain score on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), celecoxib 200 mg/day and rofecoxib 25 mg/day demonstrated similar efficacy. At week 6, celecoxib was associated with a 34-mm mean improvement on the VAS for OA pain, compared with 31.6 mm for rofecoxib and 21.2 mm for placebo. The difference between celecoxib and rofecoxib was −2.5 mm, with an upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of 2.7 mm and within the prespecified definition of noninferiority. Secondary measures of efficacy showed similar results. All differences in primary and secondary measures of efficacy between the 2 active treatments and placebo were statistically significant (P < 0.02), whereas all of the comparisons of efficacy between celecoxib and rofecoxib met the predefined criteria for noninferiority. All treatments were well tolerated throughout the study, with similar proportions of patients withdrawing due to adverse events. Conclusion Celecoxib 200 mg/day and rofecoxib 25 mg/day are equally efficacious in treating the signs and symptoms of OA.

The Standards, Audit and Guidelines Working Group (SAGWG) of the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) have recently updated the guidelines on eligibility for anti-TNF drugs in RA [1] and have updated the anti-TNF safety and efficacy guidelines [2] for general use of the rheumatology community. The National Institute for Heath and Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK, which is the is an independent organization responsible for providing national guidance in the UK on promoting good health and preventing and treating ill health, has published a technology appraisal guidance [3] for use of rituximab in RA in 2007. Furthermore, a consensus statement from EULAR [4] was also published in 2007. Therefore, it was felt appropriate to undertake a review of the currently available data as new evidence was available. The group did not wish to duplicate the guidance in those documents, but wished to review the more recent evidence and supplement what is already known.

Inhibitors of TNF-a represent important treatment advances for a number of inflammatory conditions, including RA. TNF-a inhibitors offer a targeted strategy that contrasts with the non-specific immunosuppressive agents traditionally used to treat most forms of systemic inflammation. Information on who benefits from these agents and on their adverse effects continues to be collected through clinical studies, case series and reports and through national registries. In 2001 and 2005, the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) established and updated guidelines for the use of anti-TNF drugs in RA [1, 2]. These guidelines have indicated which adult patients with RA should be eligible for treatment with anti-TNF therapies, precautions that need to be taken in their use and action that should be taken in the event of adverse effects. The previous guidelines applied to the then-available anti-TNF therapies {etanercept and infliximab in 2001 [1], and etanercept, infliximab and adalimumab (first-generation anti-TNF agents) in 2005 [2]}. Due to the large volume of information now available on these agents the BSR has, in 2010, produced separate guidelines on eligibility for anti-TNF treatment in RA (in press) These current guidelines cover the safety aspects of anti-TNF treatment in RA and apply to the first-generation products but also to the newly licensed second-generation anti-TNF drugs, certolizumab pegol and golimumab. There are relatively little safety data specifically for these second-generation agents but there are no data thus far to suggest that their side-effect profile would differ significantly from the first-generation agents. This is a rapidly changing field with new data emerging each month, so it is vital that clinicians keep up to date with this area of practice. These guidelines have Rheumatology Department, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, Rheumatology Unit, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, Rheumatology Department, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, Rheumatology Department, Poole Hospital, Poole, ARC Epidemiology Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester, Rheumatology Department, St George’s Healthcare, London, Rheumatology Department, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Lancaster, Rheumatology Department, St Helens Hospital, St Helens, National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society, Maidenhead, Rheumatology Department, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, Rheumatology Department, Trafford General Hospital, Manchester, Rheumatology Unit, Worthing and Southlands NHS Trust, Worthing and Rheumatology Department, Robert Jones and Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic Hospital, Oswestry, UK.

Chris Deighton1, Kimme Hyrich2, Tina Ding1, Jo Ledingham3, Mark Lunt2, Raashid Luqmani4, Patrick Kiely5, Marwan Bukhari6, Rikki Abernethy7, Andrew Ostor8, Ailsa Bosworth9, Kate Gadsby1, Frank McKenna10, Diana Finney11 and Josh Dixey12, on behalf of BSR Clinical Affairs Committee & Standards, Audit and Guidelines Working Group and the BHPR 1Rheumatology Department, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby; 2ARC Epidemiology Unit, University of Manchester, Manchester; 3Rheumatology Unit, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth; 4Rheumatology Department, Nuffi eld Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford; 5Rheumatology Department, St George’s Healthcare, London; 6Rheumatology Department, Royal Lancaster Infi rmary, Lancaster; 7Rheumatology Department, St Helens Hospital, St Helens; 8Rheumatology Department, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge; 9National Rheumatoid Arthritis Society, Maidenhead; 10Department of Rheumatology, Trafford General Hospital, Manchester; 11Rheumatology Unit, Worthing and Southlands NHS Trust, Worthing; 12Department of Rheumatology, Robert Jones and Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic Hospital, Oswestry, UK

Sclerosing mesenteritis is a rare condition that is characterized by fibrosis affecting mainly small-bowel mesentery, which in extensive cases may mimic advanced intra-abdominal malignancy. Establishing the diagnosis in such cases is a clinical and histopathologic challenge. We report the successful management of a case of extensive sclerosing mesenteritis with occult ileal perforation, which was possibly the triggering cause. Severe complications occurred as a result of both the disease itself and its surgical treatment. Despite the complex course and life-threatening complications, a good prognosis can be expected. Although occasional recovery has been attributed to spontaneous regression and response to immunosuppressive therapy, a search for, and full eradication of, possible triggering focus is of paramount importance.