Search

Objective: This international task force aimed to provide healthcare professionals and persons living with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with consensus-based recommendations for physical activity and exercise in SLE., Methods: Based on evidence from a systematic literature review and expert opinion, 3 overarching principles and 15 recommendations were agreed on by Delphi consensus., Results: The overarching principles highlight the importance of shared decision-making and the need to explain the benefits of physical activity to persons living with SLE and other healthcare providers. The 15 specific recommendations state that physical activity is generally recommended for all people with SLE, but in some instances, a medical evaluation may be needed to rule out contraindications. Pertaining to outdoor activity, photoprotection is necessary. Both aerobic and resistance training programmes are recommended, with a gradual increase in frequency and intensity, which should be adapted for each individual, and ideally supervised by qualified professionals., Conclusion: In summary, the consensus reached by the international task force provides a valuable framework for the integration of physical activity and exercise into the management of SLE, offering a tailored evidence-based and eminence-based approach to enhance the well-being of individuals living with this challenging autoimmune condition., Competing Interests: Competing interests: SG, TG, SA, GB, TD, YF, HH, KH, DK-H, K-YS, AL, LL, SS and AS-M have no disclosures. AM has received funding for an investigator-initiated study from GlaxoSmithKline (Project ID 10743). IP has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Novartis and Pfizer. SZS has received grant funding from Pfizer and has consulted for GlaxoSmithKline, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc, AstraZeneca, Lilly, LLC, Biogen and Cabaletta. MFU-G has received funding from Janssen and honoraria from AztraZeneca, Ferrer and GlaxoSmithKline. MYMY has received consultancy fees from Aurinia Pharmaceuticals and UCB and speaker fees from Alumis, Novartis and Roche. IP has received research funding and/or honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia, Elli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Otsuka and Roche. LA is a consultant for Alexion, Alpine, Amgen, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Grifols, Janssen, LFB, Lilly, Menarini France, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugaï, Sêmeia and UCB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Among available digital apps, those providing personalized video exercises may be helpful for individuals undergoing functional rehabilitation., Objective: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of apps providing personalized video exercises to support rehabilitation for people with short- and long-term disabling conditions, on functional capacity, confidence in exercise performance, health care consumption, health-related quality of life, adherence, and adverse events., Methods: In this systematic review, we searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and Embase databases up to March 2022. All randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of apps providing personalized video exercises to support rehabilitation for any condition requiring physical rehabilitation were included. Selection, extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed by 2 independent reviewers. The primary outcome was functional capacity at the end of the intervention. The secondary outcomes included confidence in exercise performance, care consumption, health-related quality of life, adherence, and adverse events. A meta-analysis was performed where possible; the magnitude of the effect was assessed with the standardized mean difference (SMD)., Results: From 1641 identified references, 10 papers (n=1050 participants, 93% adults) were included: 7 papers (n=906 participants) concerned musculoskeletal disorders and 3 (n=144 participants) concerned neurological disorders. Two (n=332 participants) were employee based. The apps were mostly commercial (7/10); the videos were mostly elaborated on by a physiotherapist (8/10). The duration of app use was 3-48 weeks. All included studies had a high overall risk of bias. Low-quality evidence suggested that the use of apps providing personalized video exercises led to a significant small to moderate improvement in physical function (SMD 0.35, 95% CI 0.19-0.51; Phet=.86; I 2 =0%) and confidence in exercise performance (SMD 0.67; 95% CI 0.37-0.96; Phet=.22; I 2 =33%). Because of the very low quality of the evidence, the effects on quality of life and exercise adherence were uncertain. Apps did not influence the rate of adverse events., Conclusions: Apps providing personalized video exercises to support exercise performance significantly improved physical function and confidence in exercise performance. However, the level of evidence was low; more robust studies are needed to confirm these results., Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022323670; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=323670., (©Thomas Davergne, Philippe Meidinger, Agnès Dechartres, Laure Gossec. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 13.07.2023.)

Background: Ongoing education of health professionals in rheumatology (HPR) is critical for high-quality care. An essential factor is education readiness and a high quality of educational offerings. We explored which factors contributed to education readiness and investigated currently offered postgraduate education, including the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) offerings., Methods and Participants: We developed an online questionnaire, translated it into 24 languages and distributed it in 30 European countries. We used natural language processing and the Latent Dirichlet Allocation to analyse the qualitative experiences of the participants as well as descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression to determine factors influencing postgraduate educational readiness. Reporting followed the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys guideline., Results: The questionnaire was accessed 3589 times, and 667 complete responses from 34 European countries were recorded. The highest educational needs were 'professional development', 'prevention and lifestyle intervention'. Older age, more working experience in rheumatology and higher education levels were positively associated with higher postgraduate educational readiness. While more than half of the HPR were familiar with EULAR as an association and the respondents reported an increased interest in the content of the educational offerings, the courses and the annual congress were poorly attended due to a lack of awareness, comparatively high costs and language barriers., Conclusions: To promote the uptake of EULAR educational offerings, attention is needed to increase awareness among national organisations, offer accessible participation costs, and address language barriers., Competing Interests: Competing interests: VR, LS, MRRA, MB, CB, JC, TD, JdlT, AdT, AD, FE-L, RJOF, GEF, JG, KK, MLK, CM-B, AM, JM, RHM, ElM, ErM, CN-S: no competing interest to declare. RD: Speaker fees from Abbvie, Elly Lilly, EwoPharma, Sandoz, and Novartis, all outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Although the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has improved in major way over the last decades, this disease still leads to an important burden for patients and society, and there is a need to develop more personalized approaches. Machine learning (ML) methods are more and more used in health-related studies and can be applied to different sorts of data (clinical, radiological, or 'omics' data). Such approaches may improve the management of patients with RA., Areas Covered: In this paper, we propose a review regarding ML approaches applied to RA. A scoping literature search was performed in PubMed, in September 2021 using the following MeSH terms: 'arthritis, rheumatoid' and 'machine learning'. Based on this search, the usefulness of ML methods for RA diagnosis, monitoring, and prediction of response to treatment and RA outcomes, is discussed., Expert Opinion: ML methods have the potential to revolutionize RA-related research and improve disease management and patient care. Nevertheless, these models are not yet ready to contribute fully to rheumatologists' daily practice. Indeed, these methods raise technical, methodological, and ethical issues, which should be addressed properly to allow their implementation. Collaboration between data scientists, clinical researchers, and physicians is therefore required to move this field forward.

Wearable activity trackers are playing an increasingly important role in healthcare. In the field of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), various applications are currently possible. This review will present the use of activity trackers to promote physical activity levels in rheumatology, as well as the use of trackers to measure health parameters and detect flares using artificial intelligence. Challenges and limitations of the use of artificial intelligence will be discussed, as well as technical issues when using activity trackers in clinical practice., (© 2021. Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Background: Barriers and facilitators to physical activity in inflammatory arthritis can be assessed through the Inflammatory arthritis FAcilitators and Barriers (IFAB) questionnaire. The objective was to measure the correlation between IFAB and self-reported physical activity levels., Methods: This was an international, multicentric, cross-sectional study in 2019-20. Consecutive spondyloarthritis (axSpA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients completed the 10-item IFAB, which ranges from - 70 to 70 with lower scores indicating more barriers. Physical activity was measured by the IPAQ-S questionnaire, steps per day collected by smartphone, and psychological readiness to change by stages of behaviour change. Spearman correlations and multivariable linear regression were calculated., Results: Of 245 patients included, 150 were analysed: 69 (46%) axSpA, 63 (42%) RA, 18 (12%) PsA. Mean age was 48.6 years (standard deviation, SD 17.1), mean disease duration 11.7 (10.1) years and 60% were women. Barriers to physical activity were moderate: mean IFAB, 6 (SD 19.2); 39 (26%) patients scored less than - 5, corresponding to significant barriers. The mean physical activity was 2837 (SD 2668, median 1784) MET-minutes per week. The IPAQ-S questionnaire was correlated with the IFAB (rho 0.28, p < 0.001), as well as the stage of behaviour change (rho 0.35, p < 0.001) though not with steps per day. Multivariable analyses were confirmatory., Conclusion: Perceived barriers and facilitators to physical activity were correlated with physical activity, indicating that targeting patients with high barriers and low facilitators to physical activity could be an effective option to improve physical activity levels., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrial NCT04426747 . Registered 11 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

To develop and validate a self-administered questionnaire to identify in people with Inflammatory arthritis (IA) Facilitators And Barriers to Physical activity (PA): the IFAB questionnaire. The development of the questionnaire included a systematic review of barriers and facilitators to PA to identify key themes, face validity assessment by 11 experts, and cognitive debriefing with 14 patients. The psychometric properties of the questionnaire were assessed by convergent validity (Spearman correlation) against the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ), the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire subscale for PA and the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, internal consistency (Cronbach α) in 63 IA patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Reliability and feasibility were assessed in 32 IA patients. The questionnaire comprises 10 items: 4 assessing either barriers or facilitators, 3 assessing barriers, and 3 assessing facilitators. The items are related to psychological status (N = 6), social support (N = 2), disease (N = 1), environmental factors (N = 1). The validation study included 63 patients: 26 RA, 24 axSpA, 13 PsA; with mean age 52.8 (standard deviation 16.5) years, mean disease duration 12.5 (12.3) years, and 53% of women. The questionnaire was correlated (rho = 0.24) with mHAQ. Internal consistency (Cronbach α 0.69) and reliability (interclass coefficient 0.79 [95% confidence interval 0.59; 0.88]) were satisfactory, as was feasibility (missing data 12%, mean completion time < 5 min). The questionnaire allows the assessment of barriers and facilitators to PA in patients with IA. This questionnaire may guide targeted interventions to increase levels of PA in these patients.

Objective: Functional restoration programs (FRPs) are integrative programs to improve function in chronic low back pain (cLBP). They are costly and time-consuming. The aim was to assess the effectiveness of a condensed FRP (CFRP) for patients with cLBP in professional activity., Methods: Longitudinal 3 months study of patients with cLBP in one tertiary care hospital, participating in a CFRP over 4 separate days. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included pain, quality of life (EQ5D), patient acceptable symptom state, presenteeism, absenteeism and psychological distress. Outcomes were compared using paired sample Student's t-test or Chi 2 between baseline and last follow-up. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with better response (improvement of ODI higher than 12.8)., Results: In all, 193 patients were analysed, mean age 44.6 (standard deviation (SD) 10.4) years, mean cLBP duration 9.0 (SD 8.8) years. A small improvement was observed for ODI (mean difference -5.9, 95% confidence interval: -7.6, -4.1), as well as most other outcomes. Multivariate analysis showed an association between ODI improvement and higher duration of low back pain (odds ratio for 5 years: 1.41 (1.06,1.88)) and lower baseline back strength (Sorensen, odds ratio for 1min: 0.54 [0.29,0.99])., Conclusion: This CFRP showed small effect to improve function, pain and other quality of life, in cLBP. Four-day programs may be an interesting option in cLBP patients still in professional activity for whom a long 1-month FRP is difficultly manageable. Further studies with randomized controlled designs are needed to confirm the benefits., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

In healthcare, physical activity can be monitored in two ways: self-monitoring by the patient himself or external monitoring by health professionals. Regarding self-monitoring, wearable activity trackers allow automated passive data collection that educate and motivate patients. Wearing an activity tracker can improve walking time by around 1500 steps per day. However, there are concerns about measurement accuracy (e.g., lack of a common validation protocol or measurement discrepancies between different devices). For external monitoring, many innovative electronic tools are currently used in rheumatology to help support physician time management, to reduce the burden on clinic time, and to prioritize patients who may need further attention. In inflammatory arthritis, such as rheumatoid arthritis, regular monitoring of patients to detect disease flares improves outcomes. In a pilot study applying machine learning to activity tracker steps, we showed that physical activity was strongly linked to disease flares and that patterns of physical activity could be used to predict flares with great accuracy, with a sensitivity and specificity above 95%. Thus, automatic monitoring of steps may lead to improved disease control through potential early identification of disease flares. However, activity trackers have some limitations when applied to rheumatic patients, such as tracker adherence, lack of clarity on long-term effectiveness, or the potential multiplicity of trackers.

Background: Exercise programmes are often recommended for managing ankylosing spondylitis (AS), to reduce pain and improve or maintain functional capacity., Objectives: To assess the benefits and harms of exercise programmes for people with AS., Search Methods: We searched CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, EMBASE Ovid, CINAHL EBSCO, PEDro, Scopus, and two trials registers to December 2018. We searched reference lists of identified systematic reviews and included studies, handsearched recent relevant conference proceedings, and contacted experts in the field., Selection Criteria: We included reports of randomised controlled trials (RCT) of adults with AS that compared exercise therapy programmes with an inactive control (no intervention, waiting list) or usual care., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard Cochrane methodology., Main Results: We included 14 RCTs with 1579 participants with AS. Most participants were male (70%), the median age was 45 years (range 39 to 47), and the mean symptom duration was nine years. The most frequently used exercises were those designed to help improve strength, flexibility, stretching, and breathing. Most exercise programmes were delivered along with drug therapy or a biological agent. We judged most of the studies at unclear or high risk of bias for several domains. All 14 studies provided data obtained immediately upon completion of the exercise programme. The median exercise programme duration was 12 weeks (interquartile range (IQR) 8 to 16). Three studies (146 participants) provided data for medium-term follow-up (< 24 weeks after completion of the exercise programmes), and one (63 participants) for long-term follow-up (> 24 weeks after completion of the exercise programmes). Nine studies compared exercise programmes to no intervention; five studies compared them to usual care (including physiotherapy, medication, or self-management).Exercise programmes versus no interventionAll data were obtained immediately upon completion of the exercise programme.For physical function, measured by a self-reporting questionnaire (the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) scale, 0 to 10; lower is better), moderate-quality evidence showed a no important clinically meaningful improvement with exercise programmes (mean difference (MD) -1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.7 to -0.9; 7 studies, 312 participants; absolute reduction 13%, 95% CI 17% to 9%).For pain, measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0 to 10, lower is better), low-quality evidence showed an important clinically meaningful reduction of pain with exercise (MD -2.1, 95% CI -3.6 to -0.6; 6 studies, 288 participants; absolute reduction 21%, 95% CI 36% to 6%).For patient global assessment of disease activity, measured by a self-reporting questionnaire (the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scale, 0 to 10, lower is better), moderate-quality evidence showed no important clinically meaningful reduction with exercise (MD -0.9, 95% CI -1.3 to -0.5; 6 studies, 262 participants; absolute reduction 9%, 95% CI 13% to 5%).For spinal mobility, measured by a self-reporting questionnaire (the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) scale, 0 to 10, lower is better), very low-quality evidence showed an improvement with exercise (MD -0.7 95%, -1.3 to -0.1; 5 studies, 232 participants) with no important clinical meaningful benefit (absolute reduction 7%, 95% CI 13% to 1%).For fatigue, measured on a VAS (0 to 10, lower is better), very low-quality evidence showed a no important clinically meaningful reduction with exercise (MD -1.4, 95% CI -2.7 to -0.1; 2 studies, 72 participants; absolute reduction 14%, 95% CI 27% to 1%).Exercise programmes versus usual careAll data were obtained immediately upon completion of the exercise programme.For physical function, measured by the BASFI scale, moderate-quality evidence showed an improvement with exercise (MD -0.4, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.2; 5 studies, 1068 participants). There was no important clinical meaningful benefit (absolute reduction 4%, 95% CI 6% to 2%).For pain, measured on a VAS (0 to 10, lower is better), moderate-quality evidence showed a reduction of pain with exercise (MD -0.5, 95% CI -0.9 to -0.1; 2 studies, 911 participants; absolute reduction 5%, 95% CI 9% to 1%). No important clinical meaningful benefit was found.For patient global assessment of disease activity, measured by the BASDAI scale, low-quality evidence showed a reduction with exercise (MD -0.7, 95% CI -1.3 to -0.1; 5 studies, 1068 participants), but it was not clinically important (absolute reduction 7%, 95% CI 13% to 1%) with important clinical meaningful benefitFor spinal mobility, measured by the BASMI scale, very low-quality evidence found a no important clinically meaningful improvement with exercise (MD -1.2, 95% CI -2.8 to 0.5; 2 studies, 85 participants; absolute reduction 12%, 95% CI 5% less to 28% more). There was no important clinical meaningful benefit.None of the studies measured fatigue.Adverse effectsWe found very low-quality evidence of the effect of exercise versus either no intervention, or usual care. We are uncertain of the potential for harm of exercises, due to low event rates, and a limited number of studies reporting events., Authors' Conclusions: We found moderate- to low-quality evidence that exercise programmes probably slightly improve function, may reduce pain, and probably slightly reduce global patient assessment of disease activity, when compared with no intervention, and measured upon completion of the programme. We found moderate- to low-quality evidence that exercise programmes probably have little or no effect on improving function or reducing pain, when compared with usual care, and may have little or no effect on reducing patient assessment of disease activity, when measured upon completion of the programmes. We are uncertain whether exercise programmes improve spinal mobility, reduce fatigue, or induce adverse effects.

Objective: Wearable activity trackers (WATs) could be a promising strategy to improve physical activity in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). The aim was to assess the adherence to and effectiveness of WATs to increase physical activity levels in patients with RMDs., Methods: A systematic review was performed to identify all cohorts and controlled trials evaluating WATs in patients with RMDs, published between 2000 and 2018, by searching Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane. Data collected pertained to adherence, effectiveness on physical activity, or effectiveness on symptoms (pain, function, quality of life, or fatigue). Meta-analyses were performed with a random effects model., Results: Of 2,806 references, 17 studies were included, with a total of 1,588 patients: 8 studies (47%) in osteoarthritis, 5 (29%) in low-back pain, and 3 (18%) in inflammatory arthritis. Adherence assessed in 4 studies was high (weighted mean ± SD time worn was 92.7% ± 4.6%). A significant increase in physical activity was noted (mean difference 1,520 steps [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 580, 2,460], I² = 77%; or 16 minutes [95% CI 2, 29] of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, I² = 0%). A significant increase in pain was found for long interventions (>8 weeks) (standardized mean difference 0.25 [95% CI 0.07, 0.43], I² = 0%)., Conclusion: WATs in patients with RMDs had a high short-term adherence, with a significant increase in the number of steps and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, although pain should be monitored. WATs may be an effective option to increase physical activity in this at-risk population., (© 2018, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To describe the dose components and choice justifications in exercise interventions in a convenient sample of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Data Sources: We searched the following databases: PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in 2014., Study Selection: We included published RCTs evaluating preventive or therapeutic interventions in people with clinical conditions or at risk to develop health problems., Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data and evaluated the adequacy of the justifications. We contacted and invited the trials authors to complete an online survey to ask for additional information on dose justifications and dose-effect relation., Data Synthesis: We included 187 published RCTs. Of these, 68 (36%) reported a justification for the dose choice, and 135 (72%) reported 3 doses components. Most reported components were duration (96%) and frequency (93%). Sixty-six survey responders (response rate, 35%) provided additional information. When combining the publications and survey responses, 104 (56%) trials had a justification for the dose choice. We judged justifications adequate in 45 (43%) articles. From the survey responders, 39% indicated that intensity was the dose component that can have the greatest effect on their study results., Conclusions: Most of the published RCTs adequately reported the dose components of their exercise interventions but only a small number provided sufficient justifications for dosage choices. Further studies are recommended to justify the exercise intervention dose choices., (Copyright © 2017 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)