The Patient Activation Measure in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Cross-Sectional Interview-Based Survey.

Introduction/Objective: The patient activation measure (PAM) is considered a reliable tool for measuring patient activation. This study aimed to systematically review the scientific literature regarding the use of PAM -13 in rheumatology patients and to compare PAM scores in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) following two different practices at a single institution with previously published studies. Methods: The study consisted of a systematic review of articles reporting the PAM-13 in patients with RA, followed by a cross-sectional study evaluating PAM scores between standard rheumatology clinics and specialized rheumatology clinics (SRCs). The correlation between PAM levels and other variables, such as demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment, was assessed. Results: Nineteen studies, published between 2012 and 2022, met the inclusion criteria. The studies in this review had inconsistent results and quality, with patient activation in RA ranging from 29 to 76. A total of 197 patients with confirmed RA diagnoses were interviewed (response rate, 88%). Most were female (n=173, 88%) and older than 40 years (n=150, 76%). The average patient activation score was 64.9 (standard deviation, 15.7). Most participants had level 3 and 4 patient activation measures (n=71 [36%] and n=72[37%], respectively). Patients who were attending SRCs also had borderline higher PAM levels. Patients with high PAM scores tended to be older, have active disease, and were taking corticosteroids. Conclusion: Adequate activation of patients was observed from our center, which was higher than that reported in most published literature. The PAM of patients with RA was variable according to the systematic review. Longitudinal interventional studies should be considered to improve activation in patients with low scores.

Prevalence of adverse reactions to intravenously administered originator biologics in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A 5-year retrospective study.

Background: Few Saudi studies have examined adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving intravenous (IV) originator biologics. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, types, and predictors of ADRs following long-term IV originator biologic use in patients with RA. Patients and methods: This retrospective, single-center study included adult patients with RA who received IV originator biologics between 2015 and 2020. Medical records were reviewed and data regarding ADRs were collected and evaluated for causality using the Naranjo scale. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the odds for and factors associated with developing ADRs for each biologic. Results: A total of 129 patients (87.6% women) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 54 (13) years were included in this study. A total of 1963 doses of tocilizumab (38.76%), rituximab (38.76%), abatacept (13.95%), and infliximab (8.53%), were administered during the study period. ADRs with a Naranjo score ≥ 1 were experienced by 103 (78%) patients, with an average of 2.2 events per patient. Infection (26.6%) and skin and mucous membrane disorders (14.18%) were the most commonly reported ADRs. Abatacept was associated with a significantly higher risk of multiple ADRs than the other biologics (adjusted odds ratio: 3.145, 95% confidence interval 1.004-9.854, p = 0.049). Conclusion: There was a high prevalence of ADRs among patients with RA receiving biologics. Abatacept was associated with a greater risk of multiple ADRs than other biologics. Infection was the most common ADR. Future multicenter longitudinal studies are warranted.

Relationship between different anti-rheumatic drug therapies and complementary and alternative medicine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an interview based cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is highly prevalent. The relationship of these remedies with disease therapy are not fully studied. We aimed to explore the relationship between different anti-rheumatic drug therapy and CAM use in RA patients. METHODS: The study used an interview-based cross-sectional survey in two major referral centres in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Patients were adults with confirmed RA that attended rheumatology clinics. Information on the utilization of CAM, RA duration, drug therapy, and laboratory parameters were obtained. Descriptive statistics as well as adjusted odds ratio using bivariate logistic regression were used to explore the different factors related to CAM use, including drug therapy. RESULTS: A total of 438 adult patients with RA were included. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 49 (±15.0) years. The majority were women 393 (89.7%). Two hundred and ninety-two patients (66.7%) had used CAM. The CAM users who had a longer disease duration (AOR 1.041 [95% CI: 1.011, 1.073]; p = 0.008) were more likely to be female (AOR 2.068 [95% CI: 1.098, 3.896]; p = 0.024), and use methotrexate (AOR 1.918 [95% CI: 1.249, 2.946]; p = 0.003) as opposed to celecoxib (AOR 0.509 [95% CI: 0.307, 0.844]; p = 0.009) and biologic monotherapy (AOR 0.443 [95% CI: 0.224, 0.876]; p = 0.019). Other factors related to CAM were meloxicam use (AOR 2.342 [95% CI: 1.341, 4.089]; p = 0.003) and traditional therapy (AOR 2.989 [95% CI: 1.647, 5.425]; p = 0.000). The remaining factors were not significant. CONCLUSION: CAM use is prevalent in patients with RA. Understanding patients and disease related factors associated with higher use of CAM is warranted to improve RA management and provide more rational use of these remedies.

Prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine use among rheumatoid arthritis patients in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is unexplored among Saudi rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence and types of CAM used among patients with RA and factors associated with their use. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE: A cross-sectional study was conducted at rheumatology clinics in two tertiary hospitals located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The data was collected between May 2017 and February 2018. Unpaired Student's t-tests, Chi-square tests, and Pearson correlation tests were used to compare users vs nonusers. RESULTS: A total of 438 patients (mean age = 49, SD ±â€¯15 years; 89.7% females) were included in this study. Sixty seven percent of included patients had used CAM for their RA. The majority of CAM users were female (92.1%). The most frequently used CAM products were vitamin D (47%), calcium (37%), honey (15%), ginger (13%), turmeric (11%), black seeds (8%), and fenugreek (8%). One hundred ninety-six (45%) patients believe that CAM is safe, and 287 (96%) patients took it because they believed that CAM had "added benefits". Statistically significant differences were found for gender, RA duration, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) level, and seropositivity between CAM users and nonusers (P = 0.019, P = 0.011, P = 0.022, and P < 0.0001, respectively). A significant correlation was found between the Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) level, RA duration and CAM use (r = 0.110, P = 0.022 and r = 0.121, P = 0.012, respectively). These data indicated that patients who used CAM had higher ESR level and longer disease duration than patients didn't use CAM. CONCLUSION: There is a high prevalence of CAM use among RA patients. CAM use was perceived to add benefit and patients using it had higher ESR. Larger studies are needed to assess the use of CAM and its impact on RA and its management.