Dataset Information

Physical and Emotional Burden of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data from RA Matters, a Web-Based Survey of Patients and Healthcare Professionals.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This survey assessed the impact of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) on the lives of patients based on the perceptions of both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

Methods

This is a cross-sectional survey of patients with RA. Data were collected from patients and HCPs who manage RA using a structured, closed-ended questionnaire in their local language. Respondents for the survey were recruited from survey panels of verified unique responses. The survey focused on the impact of disease on four domains: daily activities, relationships, work and aspirations.

Results

Overall, 1231 adult patients with RA and 270 rheumatologists or other HCPs were surveyed between November 2016 and February 2017. Almost one in three patients believed that the impact of RA is not well understood by people without the disease. Fifty-eight percent [95% confidence interval (CI) 55-61%] of patients felt frustrated when they were unable to undertake or complete daily activities because of their disease. Fifty-seven percent (95% CI 54-60%) of patients wished to be able to accept their life with RA. Forty-three percent (95% CI 40-46%) of patients hoped that the physical impact of RA will be better understood in future. Forty percent (95% CI 37-43%) of patients were forced to take long-term leave/retirement or experienced slow career progression since being diagnosed with RA. Twenty-three percent (95% CI 21-25%) of patients had difficulties in taking care of personal grooming, whereas 8% (95% CI 6-10%) of patients reported that RA ruined their life. Similar responses were observed among HCPs.

Conclusion

Patients and HCPs feel that the physical and emotional impact of RA is not well understood by people without the disease. In RA treatment decisions, patients' personal goals and patient-reported outcomes should be taken into consideration along with clinical targets.

Funding

Eli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN, USA).

SUBMITTER: Alten R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6858420 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDisease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are the cornerstone of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment. However, the full benefits of DMARDs are often not realized because many patients are sub-optimally adherent to their medication. In order to optimize adherence, it is essential that healthcare professionals (HCPs) understand patients' barriers and facilitators for medication use. Insight in these barriers and facilitators may foster the dialogue about adequate medication use between HCPs and patients. What HCPs perceive as barriers and facilitators has, so far, scarcely been investigated. This study aimed to identify the perceptions of HCPs on patients' barriers and facilitators that might influence their adherence.MethodsThis qualitative study was performed using semi structured in-depth interviews with HCPs. An interview guide was used, based on an adjusted version of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Thematic analysis was conducted to identify factors that influence barriers and facilitators to DMARD use according to HCPs.ResultsFifteen HCPs (5 rheumatologists, 5 nurses and 5 pharmacists) were interviewed. They mentioned a variety of factors that, according to their perceptions, influence DMARD adherence in patients with RA. Besides therapy-related factors, such as (onset of) medication effectiveness and side-effects, most variation was found within patient-related factors and reflected patients' beliefs, ways of coping, and (self-management) skills toward medication and their condition. In addition, factors related to the condition (e.g., level of disease activity), healthcare team and system (e.g., trust in HCP), and social and economic context (e.g. support, work shifts) were reported.ConclusionsThis study provided insights in HCPs' perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to DMARD use patients with RA. Most factors that were mentioned were patient-related and potentially modifiable. When physicians understand patients' perceptions on medication use, adherence to DMARDs can probably be optimized in patients with RA leading to more effectiveness of treatment outcomes.

Project description:Background/Purpose: Prior studies show an independent association between greater physical activity and lower inflammatory markers among adults in the general population, but the impact of physical activity on systemic inflammation in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) hasn’t been thoroughly investigated. We therefore aimed to determine whether physical activity behavior associates with differential expression of inflammatory genes in RA. Methods: Data derive from baseline assessments for a prospective observational cohort of patients with RA. At each study visit, we obtained detailed clinical information, collected peripheral whole blood for subsequent RNA sequencing (RNA-seq), and provided participants with actigraphs (GT9X ActiGraph Link device) to objectively measure physical activity by wearing the device at home for 7 consecutive 24-hour periods. Participants were categorized into three physical activity groups based on the highest (“active”), middle (“intermediate”), and lowest (“inactive”) tertiles for percentage of time spent in moderate/vigorous physical activity (metabolic equivalent (MET) level ≥2.00) across the sample. Results: There were 35 patients with complete clinical, actigraphy, and transcriptomic data available for analysis. The participants had a mean age of 56 years, were 90% female, and self-reported the following racial/ethnic identities: 32% white, 11% African American, 8% Asian, 40% Hispanic. Participants spent 48%, 41%, and 12% of time awake in sedentary, light, and moderate physical activity, respectively. None of the participants achieved vigorous activity. The patients in the most active group were younger but did not otherwise significantly differ by clinical and demographic characteristics compared to the other physical activity groups. However, in the differential gene expression analysis comparing the highest versus lowest physical activity tertiles, there were 365 up- and 402 down-regulated genes at an adjusted P value < 0.1. Gene set enrichment analysis revealed that the most physically active patients exhibited downregulation of diverse innate and adaptive immune signaling pathways. Assessment of upstream cytokine activation states demonstrated inhibition of type I, II and III interferons and activation of EPO in the highest physical activity tertile patients. Conclusion: Among a racially and ethnically diverse RA cohort, participants who spent more time in moderately intense physical activity had down-regulation of genes involved in both innate and adaptive immune signaling compared to those who were more sedentary. These findings provide mechanistic evidence to support a disease-modifying effect of physical activity in RA.

Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing research interest in the development of preventive treatment for individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Previous studies have explored the perceptions of at-risk groups and patients about predictive and preventive strategies for RA, but little is known about health care professionals' (HCPs) perspectives.MethodsOne-to-one semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted (face-to-face or by telephone) with HCPs. Audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed, and the data were analysed by thematic analysis.ResultsNineteen HCPs (11 female) were interviewed, including ten GPs, six rheumatologists and three rheumatology nurse specialists. The thematic analysis identified four organising themes: 1) Attributes of predictive and preventive approaches; 2) Ethical and psychological concerns; 3) Implementation issues and 4) Learning from management of other conditions. Theme 1 described necessary attributes of predictive and preventive approaches, including the type and performance of predictive tools, the need for a sound evidence base and consideration of risks and benefits associated with preventive treatment. Theme 2 described the ethical and psycho-social concerns that interviewees raised, including the potential negative economic, financial and psychological effects of risk disclosure for 'at-risk' individuals, uncertainty around the development of RA and the potential for benefit associated with the treatments being considered. Theme 3 describes the implementation issues considered, including knowledge and training needs, costs and resource implications of implementing predictive and preventive approaches, the role of different types of HCPs, guidelines and tools needed, and patient characteristics relating to the appropriateness of preventive treatments. Theme 4 describes lessons that could be learned from interviewees' experiences of prediction and prevention in other disease areas, including how preventive treatment is prescribed, existing guidelines and tools for other diseases and issues relating to risk communication.ConclusionsFor successful implementation of predictive and preventative approaches in RA, HCPs need appropriate training about use and interpretation of predictive tools, communication of results to at-risk individuals, and options for intervention. Evidence of cost-efficiency, appropriate resource allocation, adaptation of official guidelines and careful consideration of the at-risk individuals' psycho-social needs are also needed.

Project description:IntroductionBrenzys was developed as an etanercept biosimilar of Enbrel. The aim of this study was to assess preference and perceived ease of use for the new Brenzys autoinjector compared to the currently available marketed Enbrel MYCLIC autoinjector (Australia) and Enbrel SureClick autoinjector (Canada) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Because RA affects manual dexterity, ease of use of an autoinjector is a particularly important consideration in developing effective self-delivery of long-term courses of therapy.MethodsPatients (N = 191) reporting a diagnosis of RA and nurses and rheumatologists (N = 90) with experience managing RA were shown how to use Brenzys and Enbrel autoinjectors (in counterbalanced order between participants), then they used each autoinjector by injecting into a pad simulating skin, and completed a questionnaire. Study sessions took place in Australia and Canada.ResultsA binomial test showed that significantly more patients indicated that the Brenzys autoinjector was easier to use than the Enbrel autoinjector (79% reporting Brenzys easier to use; p < 0.001, two-sided, 95% CI [73%, 85%]). In addition, significantly more nurses and rheumatologists with experience managing RA also indicated that the Brenzys autoinjector was easier to use (86%; p < 0.001, two-sided, 95% CI [77%, 92%) and that they would recommend the buttonless Brenzys autoinjector over the Enbrel autoinjector to patients (83%; p < 0.001, two-sided, 95% CI [74%, 90%]). Almost all patients who reported past experience using an Enbrel autoinjector (N = 17) reported on the basis of using the two devices in the study that they would prefer to switch their device to the Brenzys autoinjector rather than continue their course of therapy using the Enbrel autoinjector (16/17, 94%, 95% CI [71%, 100%]).ConclusionOn the basis of the study results, the Brenzys autoinjector was rated statistically significantly easier to use, and was overall preferred by patients and healthcare professionals with experience managing RA patients.FundingMerck & Co., Inc.