A scoping review of triage approaches for the referral of patients with suspected inflammatory arthritis, from primary to rheumatology care.

We aimed to (1) identify existing triage approaches for referral of patients with suspected inflammatory arthritis (IA) from primary care physicians (PCP) to rheumatologists, (2) describe their characteristics and methodologies for clinical use, and (3) report their level of validation for use in a publicly funded healthcare system. The comprehensive search strategy of multiple databases up to October 2023 identified relevant literature and focussed on approaches applied at the PCP-Rheumatologist referral stage. Primary, quantitative studies, reported in English were included. Triage approaches were grouped into patient conditions as defined by the authors of the reports, including IA, its subtypes and combinations. 13952 records were identified, 425 full text reviewed and 55 reports of 53 unique studies were included. Heterogeneity in disease nomenclature and study sample pretest probability was found. The number of published studies rapidly increased after 2012. Studies were mostly from Europe and North America, in IA and Axial Spondyloarthritis (AxSpa). We found tools ranging the continuum of development with those best performing, indicated by the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) >0.8), requiring only patient-reported questions. There were AUCs for some tools reported from multiple studies, these were in the outstanding to excellent range for the Early IA Questionnaire (EIAQ) (0.88 to 0.92), acceptable for the Case Finding AxSpa (CaFaSpa) (0.70 to 0.75), and poor to outstanding for the Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST) (0.61 to 0.91). Given the clinical urgency to improve rheumatology referrals and considering the good.

The Association of Rheumatologist Supply and Multidisciplinary Care With Timely Patient Access to Rheumatologists: Evidence From British Columbia, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to understand how the expansion of rheumatology supply and the introduction of multidisciplinary care was associated with access to rheumatology services. METHODS: We accessed Population Data BC, a longitudinal database with de-identified individual-level health data on all residents of British Columbia, Canada, to analyze physician visits and prescribing from 2010-2011 to 2019-2020. We calculated access as the time from referral to first rheumatologist visit and, for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), time to first disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Associations between lag time, patient characteristics, and system variables were explored using quantile regression. RESULTS: Over the study period, there were 149,902 new rheumatologist visits, with 31% more visits in 2019-2020 than in 2010-2011. The proportion of first visits for patients with inflammatory arthritis increased from 28% to 51%. The median time from referral to first visit decreased by 22 days (35%) from 63 days (interquartile range 21-120 days) in 2010-2011. For people with RA, time from referral to DMARD decreased by 4 days (6%) to 62 days. Male sex, living in metropolitan areas, and having a rheumatologist who used a multidisciplinary care assessment code were associated with shorter times from referral to first DMARD. CONCLUSION: Access to rheumatology care improved, and the increased proportion of patients with IA in the first visits case-mix indicates that rheumatologist supply and incentives for multidisciplinary care may have improved referral patterns. However, time to DMARDs for people with RA remained long, and we found signals of unequal access for female patients and people living outside of metropolitan areas.

Patient Perspectives on a Digital Mobile Health Application for RA.

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence suggests that patients are increasingly willing to use digital mobile health applications for rheumatoid arthritis (RA apps). The development and diffusion of RA apps open the possibility of improved management of the disease and better physician-patient interactions. However, adoption rates among apps have been lower than hoped, and research shows that many available RA apps lack key features. There is little research exploring patient preferences for RA apps or patients' habits and preferences for app payment, which are likely key factors affecting adoption of this technology. This study seeks to understand characteristics of RA patients who have adopted RA apps, their preferences for app features, and their willingness to pay for, and experiences with app payment. METHODS: Data for this study come from a 33-question online survey of patients with RA in Canada and the United States (N=30). Information on demographics, diagnosis and management of RA, current use and desired features of RA apps, and prior experience with and willingness to pay for an app was collected. Descriptive statistics are reported, and bivariate analyses (chi-square, point-biserial correlation, and ANOVA) were performed to understand relationships between variables. RESULTS: Respondents showed a clear preference for certain app features, namely symptom tracking, scheduling appointments, and reminders. Physician recommendation for an app and patient tracking of symptoms with an app were significantly related to patient adoption of an RA app. Years since diagnosis with RA, physician recommendation for an RA app, and current use of a non-RA health tracking app were significantly related to patients' willingness to pay a subscription for an RA app. CONCLUSION: RA patients appear to prefer task support features in an RA app, notably symptom tracking, appointment scheduling, and reminders, over other features such as those related to dialogue support and social support. The choice of whether an RA app will be free or based on a subscription, pay-per-service, or one-time purchase model may also play a role in eventual adoption. Similarly, physician recommendation appears to influence patients' decision to use an RA app as well as their willingness to pay a subscription for an app.

Impending radiographic erosive progression over the following year in a cohort of consecutive patients with inflammatory polyarthritis: prediction by serum biomarkers.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To evaluate biomarkers as predictors of impending erosion progression. METHODS: Variables were measured at baseline and annually up to 5 years in patients with recent-onset polyarthritis treated to zero swollen joints. Erosive status was defined as ≥5 Units in Sharp/van der Heijde Erosion Score; Rapid Erosive Progression (REP) was defined as an increase ≥5 Units in Erosion Scores between consecutive visits. Generalised estimating equations (GEEs) evaluated the effect on REP of positive anticyclic citrullinated peptides (ACPAs) and/or rheumatoid factor (RF), C-reactive protein ˃8.0 mg/L (High-CRP) and 14-3-3η protein ≥0.50 ng/mL (High-14-3-3η), alone and in combinations. RESULTS: Out of 2155 evaluations in 749 consecutive patients, REP occurred after 186 (8.6%) visits, including 13 (2.2%) in patients recruited since 2010. Only 18/537 (3.4%; 6/411 (1.5%) in non-erosive vs 12/126 (9.5%) in patients already erosive) visits without any positive biomarker were followed by REP; at least one biomarker was positive prior to REP in 168/186 (90.3%) visits. Being positive for all four biomarkers conferred a positive predictive value (PPV) of 30.0% (RR 21.8) in patients non-erosive at the visit versus 35.5% (RR 3.07) in those already erosive. High-14-3-3η increased REP only in visits with High-CRP (eg, RR 2.5 to 3.9 when ACPA also positive) and in patients with non-erosive status (eg, RR from 4.3 to 9.4 when also High-CRP). CONCLUSIONS: Adding High-14-3-3η to positive antibodies and CRP improves prediction of impending REP. Although REP is becoming rarer, signatures of biomarkers might help to adapt treatment strategies in at-risk individuals, even those already erosive.

Tumour necrosis factor alpha promotes secretion of 14-3-3η by inducing necroptosis in macrophages.

BACKGROUND: 14-3-3η is an intracellular protein also detected in the serum and synovial fluid of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is closely related to disease activity and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody levels. However, the main source of 14-3-3η and the mechanism of its release into the extracellular space remain unclear. Addressing these two points was the main goal of the current study. METHODS: The source of 14-3-3η was investigated by immunostaining RA synovial tissue. Fibroblast-like synoviocytes, CD4+ cells, and macrophages were selected as candidates among the various cell types in the synovial tissue. Phosphorylation of mixed-lineage kinase domain-like pseudokinase (MLKL) and cell death of macrophages were studied by phalloidin staining and electron microscopy after stimulation with an oxidative stress inducer (diamide) or tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α. Extracellular 14-3-3η protein levels were examined by western blotting. RESULTS: Macrophages from the synovial tissue from RA, but not osteoarthritis, showed dense and widespread cytoplasmic staining for the 14-3-3η protein, co-localized with peptidylarginine deiminase 4. Swelling and membrane rupture of macrophages were induced by treatment with TNF-α, but not interleukin (IL) 6/soluble IL-6 receptor (sIL-6R). Increased MLKL phosphorylation followed by necroptosis was also induced in TNF-α-stimulated macrophages. Necrostatin-1, a necroptosis inhibitor, antagonized MLKL phosphorylation. High levels of 14-3-3η were detected in the culture supernatants of macrophages stimulated with diamide and TNF-α, but not IL-6/sIL-6R. CONCLUSIONS: Macrophages that highly express 14-3-3η undergo TNF-α-induced necroptosis with damage to the cellular structure, resulting in the secretion of 14-3-3η into the extracellular space. The current study provides a novel mechanism for 14-3-3η level increase in the RA synovial fluid.