Search

ObjectiveTo develop a Gout, Hyperuricaemia and Crystal-Associated Disease Network (G-CAN) common language definition of gout, with the goal of increasing public understanding and awareness, and ensure consistent and understandable messages about gout.MethodsA G-CAN working group that included patients, physicians and nongovernmental organisation (NGO) representatives was formed to develop a common language definition of gout for use with the public, media, healthcare providers and stakeholders. A literature search and interviews with patients, healthcare workers and stakeholders informed development of the definition. Following consultation with G-CAN members and partners, the definition was endorsed by the G-CAN board.ResultsThe G-CAN common language definition of gout describes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, symptoms and impact, risk factors, comorbidities, management and healthcare and workforce considerations. Detailed information is provided to support the content of the definition. After the publication of the English-language version, the definition will be available for translation into other languages by G-CAN members.ConclusionG-CAN has developed a concise and easily understandable statement describing gout in language that can be used in conversations with the lay public, media, NGOs, funders, healthcare providers and other stakeholders.

Objective: Transitions to biosimilars are common to reduce the cost burden of biologics. While brand changes can be daunting for patients, few studies have explored patients' experiences with the transitioning process. This study examined rheumatology patients' experiences with a mandatory nationwide brand change to an adalimumab biosimilar. Methods: People with rheumatic diseases involved in the adalimumab transition in Aotearoa New Zealand completed a nationwide online survey. Participants (n = 117, 48% with rheumatoid arthritis) reported their satisfaction with the biosimilar, logistics and supply, information and communication, and availability of support. They also reported what did and did not go well during the transition and provided recommendations for future transitions. Results: The mean [SD] satisfaction score with the transition was 6.2 [3.2] on a 0‐10 scale, with 10 indicating high satisfaction. Participants were the least satisfied with the support and information from patient support organizations, and training for the device during the transition. Participants were most satisfied with the biosimilar supply, support from pharmacists, and how early they were informed before the transition occurred. After the transition, participants were less satisfied with the device quality, patient support program, biosimilar safety and efficacy, and the provision of alcohol wipes and sharps bins (p < 0.05 for all). Satisfaction with training for the biosimilar device (B =.25, p =.036) predicted overall satisfaction. Participants appreciated less injection pain and the ease of the biosimilar device. The lack of alcohol wipes and loss of the bio‐originator support program were viewed negatively. Conclusion: Future biosimilar transitions should ensure the availability of alcohol wipes, sharps bins, and a comparable patient support program. Patient support organizations could be involved in providing information to patients about the change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]