Search

Background: Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) involvement is an often underrecognized complication of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) that can cause decreased mandibular growth, altered facial morphology, and orofacial pain. It is estimated that the TMJ is affected in 30-45% of children with JIA. Standardized physical examination and imaging evaluations are important in accurately assessing active TMJ arthritis and sequalae. Little is known about the rate at which providers evaluate TMJ involvement in their clinical practice., Methods: Data were obtained from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry. Data fields related to assessment for TMJ arthritis were added in 2019. Patients were included in the study if they had a diagnosis of JIA and had data recorded between January 2020 and August 2021. Standard descriptive statistics were used to describe demographic and clinical features., Results: A total of 17,761 visits were reviewed for a total of 7473 patients with JIA. A total of 52.7% of patients had maximal mouth opening (MMO) recorded as finger breadths or total incisal distance (TID). Only 8% had TID measured. A total of 5.0% had MRI with contrast performed. A total of 939 patients had a diagnosis of TMJ arthritis. Of these, 28.5% had an MRI documented, 83% had an MMO documented, and 40% had TID measured. Few patient-level characteristics were statistically related to having MMO assessed. MRI was more likely to be obtained in older and in female patients. MMO was recorded at a given visit > 80% of the time at 17 sites, and it was recorded < 1% of the time at 8 sites. MRIs were infrequently performed at all sites, with 27 sites having no MRIs obtained and only 7 sites having an MRI obtained at > 10% of visits., Conclusions: MMO is not consistently measured in patients with JIA, and it is rarely measured quantitatively. Similarly, TMJ MRIs are rarely obtained in patients with JIA. Site of care is more associated with TMJ assessments than patient-level characteristics. These data suggest that provider education is needed to improve the assessment of the TMJ in patients with JIA to enable earlier recognition and prevent long-term complications., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The interleukin-1 (IL-1) mediated systemic autoinflammatory diseases, including the cryopyrin- associated periodic syndromes (CAPS), tumour necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic syndrome (TRAPS), mevalonate kinase deficiency (MKD) and deficiency of the IL-1 receptor antagonist (DIRA), belong to a group of rare immunodysregulatory diseases that primarily present in early childhood with variable multiorgan involvement. When untreated, patients with severe clinical phenotypes have a poor prognosis, and diagnosis and management of these patients can be challenging. However, approved treatments targeting the proinflammatory cytokine IL-1 have been life changing and have significantly improved patient outcomes., Objective: To establish evidence-based recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of patients with IL-1 mediated autoinflammatory diseases to standardise their management., Methods: A multinational, multidisciplinary task force consisting of physician experts, including rheumatologists, patients or caregivers and allied healthcare professionals, was established. Evidence synthesis, including systematic literature review and expert consensus (Delphi) via surveys, was conducted. Consensus methodology was used to formulate and vote on statements to guide optimal patient care., Results: The task force devised five overarching principles, 14 statements related to diagnosis, 10 on therapy, and nine focused on long-term monitoring that were evidence and/or consensus-based for patients with IL-1 mediated diseases. An outline was developed for disease-specific monitoring of inflammation-induced organ damage progression and reported treatments of CAPS, TRAPS, MKD and DIRA., Conclusion: The 2021 EULAR/American College of Rheumatology points to consider represent state-of-the-art knowledge based on published data and expert opinion to guide diagnostic evaluation, treatment and monitoring of patients with CAPS, TRAPS, MKD and DIRA, and to standardise and improve care, quality of life and disease outcomes., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Objective: To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype., Methods: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations., Results: Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional., Conclusion: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided., Methods: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations., Results: Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional., Conclusion: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To operationalize and report on nationally endorsed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) performance measures (PMs) using health administrative data for British Columbia (BC), Canada., Methods: All patients with RA in BC ages ≥18 years were identified between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2009 using health administrative data and followed until December 2014. PMs tested include: the percentage of incident patients with ≥1 rheumatologist visit within 365 days; the percentage of prevalent patients with ≥1 rheumatologist visit per year; the percentage of prevalent patients dispensed disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy; and time from RA diagnosis to DMARD therapy. Measures were reported on patients seen by rheumatologists, and in the total population., Results: The cohort included 38,673 incident and 57,922 prevalent RA cases. The percentage of patients seen by a rheumatologist within 365 days increased over time (35% in 2000 to 65% in 2009), while the percentage of RA patients under the care of a rheumatologist seen yearly declined (79% in 2001 to 39% in 2014). The decline was due to decreasing visit rates with increasing follow-up time rather than calendar effect. The percentage of RA patients dispensed a DMARD was suboptimal over follow-up (37% in 2014) in the total population but higher (87%) in those under current rheumatologist care. The median time to DMARD in those seen by a rheumatologist improved from 49 days in 2000 to 23 days in 2009, with 34% receiving treatment within the 14-day benchmark., Conclusion: This study describes the operationalization and reporting of national PMs using administrative data and identifies gaps in care to further examine and address., (© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Early diagnosis and treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) is essential to optimize outcomes. Wait times (WTs) to consultation with a pediatric rheumatologist consultation is a Canadian quality measure, with benchmarks set at 7 days for systemic JIA (sJIA) and 4 weeks for other JIA categories. In this study we assess WTs for JIA at a single academic center and describe factors associated with longer WTs., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of 164 patients enrolled in a pharmacogenetic study in Alberta between 2002 and 2018. Limited chart reviews were conducted to evaluate dates of referral and first rheumatology visit to calculate WTs for receipt of pediatric rheumatology care. Cox proportional hazard models identified factors associated with WTs considering variables at the first pediatric rheumatology visit including: JIA category, age, sex, distance to the pediatric rheumatology clinic, number of active joints, pain and C-reactive protein., Results: The median age at diagnosis was 8.0 years (interquartile range, IQR 3.5, 12.0) and 46% of patients had oligoarticular JIA. Only 18 patients (11%) were from rural locations. The median WT for all patients met the national benchmark (22 days, IQR, 9, 44) with no statistically significant difference between WTs among JIA categories (p = 0.055). Importantly, the majority of sJIA cases met the 7-day benchmark (67%) with a median WT of 1.5 days. Older age was associated with longer WT (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89, 0.98, p = 0.005)., Conclusion: Median benchmarks were met, however delays in older patients highlight the need for monitoring WTs.