Dataset Information

Diurnal variation of gait in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: The DIVIGN study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Circadian variation of joint stiffness (morning stiffness) and its impact on functional ability are widely recognised in rheumatoid arthritis. Subsequent within-day variation of walking ability is important due to the increased availability of instrumented gait analysis. This study aimed to quantify diurnal variation of gait in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and explore associations with disease characteristics.

Methods

Thirty one inpatients with rheumatoid arthritis walked at a self-selected speed along a GAITRite instrumented walkway 5 times during a single day.

Findings

Participants showed marked diurnal variation in gait, leading to a systematic variation throughout the day (F=19.56, P=<0.001). Gait velocity and stride length both increased, whereas the proportion of each gait cycle spent in stance phase or double support decreased, consistent with improving function throughout the day. Although absolute gait velocity correlated with disease characteristics, the magnitude of diurnal variation appeared to be independent of disease activity (rho=0.26, P=0.15), disease duration (rho=-0.19, P=0.324), and underlying functional ability (rho=0.09, P=0.65).

Interpretation

Although morning stiffness is well recognised in rheumatoid arthritis, this is the first time that its effect on gait has been quantified. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis exhibited a systematic change in walking ability throughout the day, which was independent of disease characteristics. These findings have important implications for the interpretation of existing data and the design of future studies. Repeat measures should be conducted at the same time of day to exclude the effects of diurnal variation.

SUBMITTER: Backhouse MR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4166456 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesAlthough morning stiffness has long been recognized as a characteristic feature of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), it is no more included in the 2010 ACR/EULAR Classification Criteria or in the current major instruments for evaluating disease activity of RA. In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to determine the independent value and the optimal measurement of morning stiffness by clarifying the associations between morning stiffness and synovial inflammation.Patients and methodsWe enrolled 76 consecutive RA patients who underwent musculoskeletal ultrasound examination and agreed to participate in the study. In addition to asking the duration of morning stiffness, we asked patients to complete a diagram which represents the time course of their morning stiffness in the dominant hand. Based on this diagram, we calculated the severity and the diurnal improvement of morning stiffness. We also determined the activity of intra-articular synovitis in 11 joints and tenosynovitis in 8 tendons/tendon compartments in the same hand by using power Doppler (PD) ultrasound with a semiquantitative score (0-3).ResultsFor intra-articular synovitis, swollen/tender joint counts more strongly correlated with total PD scores (? = 0.379-0.561, p ? 0.001) than did any parameters of morning stiffness (? = 0.217-0.314, p = 0.006-0.021). For tenosynovitis, however, the severity on awakening and the improvement of morning stiffness more strongly correlated with total PD scores (? = 0.503-0.561, p < 0.001) than did swollen/tender joint counts (? = 0.276-0.388, p = 0.001-0.016). Multivariate analyses identified the severity on awakening and the improvement but not the duration of morning stiffness as factors that independently associate with the total tenosynovial PD score.ConclusionsOur data demonstrate a pathophysiological link between morning stiffness and tenosynovitis and also give an insight into the optimal measurement of morning stiffness. Our data support an independent value of evaluating morning stiffness in the management of RA.

Project description:BackgroundFoot impairments in early rheumatoid arthritis are common and lead to progressive deterioration of lower limb function. A gait rehabilitation programme underpinned by psychological techniques to improve adherence, may preserve gait and lower limb function. This study evaluated the feasibility of a novel gait rehabilitation intervention (GREAT Strides) and a future trial.MethodsThis was a mixed methods feasibility study with embedded qualitative components. People with early (< 2 years) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and foot pain were eligible. Intervention acceptability was evaluated using a questionnaire. Adherence was evaluated using the Exercise Adherence Rating Scale (EARS). Safety was monitored using case report forms. Participants and therapists were interviewed to explore intervention acceptability. Deductive thematic analysis was applied using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. For fidelity, audio recordings of interventions sessions were assessed using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI) scale. Measurement properties of four candidate primary outcomes, rates of recruitment, attrition, and data completeness were evaluated.ResultsThirty-five participants (68.6% female) with median age (inter-quartile range [IQR]) 60.1 [49.4-68.4] years and disease duration 9.1 [4.0-16.2] months), were recruited and 23 (65.7%) completed 12-week follow-up. Intervention acceptability was excellent; 21/23 were confident that it could help and would recommend it; 22/23 indicated it made sense to them. Adherence was good, with a median [IQR] EARS score of 17/24 [12.5-22.5]. One serious adverse event that was unrelated to the study was reported. Twelve participants' and 9 therapists' interviews confirmed intervention acceptability, identified perceptions of benefit, but also highlighted some barriers to completion. Mean MITI scores for relational (4.38) and technical (4.19) aspects of motivational interviewing demonstrated good fidelity. The Foot Function Index disability subscale performed best in terms of theoretical consistency and was deemed most practical.ConclusionGREAT Strides was viewed as acceptable by patients and therapists, and we observed high intervention fidelity, good patient adherence, and no safety concerns. A future trial to test the additional benefit of GREAT Strides to usual care will benefit from amended eligibility criteria, refinement of the intervention and strategies to ensure higher follow-up rates. The Foot Function Index disability subscale was identified as the primary outcome for the future trial.Trial registrationISRCTN14277030.