Facilitating Activity and Self-management for people with Arthritic knee, hip or lower back pain (FASA): A cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain including osteoarthritis (OA) can significantly limit the functional independence of individuals. The spine and hip and knee are predominantly affected; management guidelines for each recommend exercise and education to support self-management. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effectiveness of a generic exercise and self-management intervention for people over-50 with hip/knee OA and/or lower back pain compared to continued GP management. DESIGN: Single blind, cluster randomised controlled trial. METHOD: Participants who had previously consulted with hip/knee OA and/or chronic lower back pain were recruited from 45 GP practices in SW England. Practices were randomly allocated to receive continued GP care (control) or continued GP care and a 6-week group exercise and self-management intervention facilitated by a physiotherapist and located in a community-based physiotherapy department. The primary outcome measure was the Dysfunction Index of the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (DI-SMFA) measured at six month post-rehabilitation. RESULTS: 349 participants were recruited and allocated to the intervention (n = 170) or control (n = 179) arms; the attrition rate was 13% at the 6 month primary end-point. One minor adverse event in the intervention group that required no medical input was reported. Intervention arm participants reported better function at 6 months compared with continued GP management alone (-3.01 difference in DI-SMFA [95%CI -5.25, -0.76], p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A generic exercise and self-management intervention resulted in statistically significant changes in function after six-months compared with GP management alone, but clinical significance of these findings is less clear. This may be an effective way of managing group interventions for lower limb OA and chronic lower back pain.

Reducing arthritis fatigue impact: two-year randomised controlled trial of cognitive behavioural approaches by rheumatology teams (RAFT).

OBJECTIVES: To see if a group course delivered by rheumatology teams using cognitive-behavioural approaches, plus usual care, reduced RA fatigue impact more than usual care alone. METHODS: Multicentre, 2-year randomised controlled trial in RA adults (fatigue severity>6/10, no recent major medication changes). RAFT (Reducing Arthritis Fatigue: clinical Teams using CB approaches) comprises seven sessions, codelivered by pairs of trained rheumatology occupational therapists/nurses. Usual care was Arthritis Research UK fatigue booklet. Primary 26-week outcome fatigue impact (Bristol RA Fatigue Effect Numerical Rating Scale, BRAF-NRS 0-10). Intention-to-treat regression analysis adjusted for baseline scores and centre. RESULTS: 308/333 randomised patients completed 26 week data (156/175 RAFT, 152/158 Control). Mean baseline variables were similar. At 26 weeks, the adjusted difference between arms for fatigue impact change favoured RAFT (BRAF-NRS Effect -0.59, 95% CI -1.11 to -0.06), BRAF Multidimensional Questionnaire (MDQ) Total -3.42 (95% CI -6.44 to -0.39), Living with Fatigue -1.19 (95% CI -2.17 to -0.21), Emotional Fatigue -0.91 (95% CI -1.58 to -0.23); RA Self-Efficacy (RASE, +3.05, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.66) (14 secondary outcomes unchanged). Effects persisted at 2 years: BRAF-NRS Effect -0.49 (95% CI -0.83 to -0.14), BRAF MDQ Total -2.98 (95% CI -5.39 to -0.57), Living with Fatigue -0.93 (95% CI -1.75 to -0.10), Emotional Fatigue -0.90 (95% CI -1.44, to -0.37); BRAF-NRS Coping +0.42 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.77) (relevance of fatigue impact improvement uncertain). RAFT satisfaction: 89% scored > 8/10 vs 54% controls rating usual care booklet (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Multiple RA fatigue impacts can be improved for 2 years by rheumatology teams delivering a group programme using cognitive behavioural approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN52709998.

Development and testing of candidate items for inclusion in a new rheumatoid arthritis stiffness patient-reported outcome measure.

Objective: To qualitatively develop and test a set of candidate items for a new RA stiffness patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that capture the patient perspective. This is an essential first step in PROM development, prior to quantitative development, assessment and validation. Methods: Focus groups further examined the previously developed stiffness conceptual model and explored the patient perspective regarding stiffness assessment. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. An iterative process of item development was then performed by the expert study team of researchers, patients and clinicians, based on the two qualitative datasets and informed by measurement theory and guidelines. Finally, these candidate items were tested using formal cognitive interview methodology and subsequently refined. Results: Sixteen RA patients from the UK participated in focus groups. Data confirmed the conceptual model of the RA patient experience of stiffness and provided insight into stiffness assessment, including suggestions regarding patient-relevant stiffness assessment categories such as impact, location and timing. These data informed the development of 77 candidate stiffness PROM items, including multiple formats for some. Eleven RA patients participated in cognitive interviews. Minor changes were made to items to enhance understanding and 32 items were removed, resulting in 45 candidate PROM items. Conclusion: Rigorous qualitative methodology and considerable patient involvement has underpinned items for a new RA stiffness PROM with strong content validity. Crucially, patient involvement broadened assessment beyond early morning stiffness duration, which may address existing PROM limitations. Items are now suitable for quantitative item reduction, structural development of the final PROM and validation.

Prevalence, impact and care of foot problems in people with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a United Kingdom based cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Foot symptoms in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) derive from a combination of inflammation, altered foot mechanics, deformity and secondary skin lesions. Guidelines recommend regular review of patients' feet, but the extent to which the general population of RA patients report foot symptoms and access foot care has not been established. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence, impact and care of foot problems in all patients with RA in one geographical area and identify factors associated with accessing foot care. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of a random sample of patients with RA, who resided within a single community-based National Health Service (NHS) podiatry service. The questionnaire collected demographic data (age, gender, local deprivation score), clinical data (disease duration, arthritis medications, disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)), current foot problems, foot care accessed (podiatry, orthotics and/or orthopaedics) and care received, measures of impact (Foot Impact Scale) and ability to work. RESULTS: Of 1003 total eligible patients in the target population, 739 were posted survey packs. Of these 413 (56%) replied. Responders and non-responders had similar age (63.5 yr. vs.61.5 yr), gender (74.1%F vs. 75.2%F), and highest deprivation category (13.3% vs.15.9%). Of the responders 92.1% reported current foot problems: articular 73.8%, cutaneous lesions 65.4%, structural 57.6%, extra-articular 42.6%. Responders' median (IQR) disease duration 10 (5-20) years, HAQ 1.5 (0.75-2.0), FISIF 10 (6-14) and FISAP 16 (7-23) and 37.8% reported impacts on work. While 69.5% had accessed foot care there were differences in the route of access (by gender and whether independent or NHS provision) and were older (64.9 yr. vs 60.4 yr. p = 0.001), had longer disease duration (12 yr. vs 7 yr. p < 0.001) and had a greater proportion of females (72.2% vs 61.7% p = 0.04) than those who had not accessed care. CONCLUSIONS: Current foot problems were reported by 92.1% of the study sample and substantially impacted on life and work. While overall access to foot care was higher than anticipated, routes of access differed and extent of current problems suggests the provision of effective, timely and targeted care is a pressing need.

Patients' Perspectives on the Psychological Impact of Inflammatory Arthritis and Meeting the Associated Support Needs: Open-Ended Responses in a Multi-Centre Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Psychological support for inflammatory arthritis is recommended in rheumatology treatment guidelines. Previous research found that high numbers of patients would access such support but that provision is often inconsistent and inadequate. The present study explored patients' perspectives on the nature of the psychological impact of inflammatory arthritis and how to meet the associated support needs. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted, using questionnaires which included three open-ended questions about helpful and unhelpful psychological support. The questionnaires were administered to 1,080 patients at six regional rheumatology units across England, and 1,200 members of a national patient charity. RESULTS: A total of 1,210 (53%) patients completed the questionnaire, with 779 (64%) responding to the open-ended questions: 80% female; mean age 59 years (12.6); disease duration <5 years (40%), 5-10 years (20%), >10 years (40%). Data were analysed using a hybrid content analysis. Four categories emerged: challenges of an altered life course (negative emotions, isolation and loneliness, a dysfunctional body, loss, strained relationships, and fears for the future); poor communication (feeling unheard, clinicians' reluctance to address psychological issues, a lack of help to manage pain and fatigue, and struggling to ask for help); understood by others (sharing with people who have arthritis, supportive family and friends, whole team support, and understanding from clinicians); and acquiring strategies (ways of coping). CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress was commonplace, and often attributed to fatigue and pain. In addition to peers and family, patients looked to the rheumatology team for validation and support. Further research will address the skills training needs of rheumatology teams to meet patients' psychological support requirements.

Biologic interventions for fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a common and potentially distressing symptom for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with no accepted evidence-based management guidelines. Evidence suggests that biologic interventions improve symptoms and signs in RA as well as reducing joint damage. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of biologic interventions on fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases up to 1 April 2014: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Current Controlled Trials Register, the National Research Register Archive, The UKCRN Portfolio Database, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Science Citation Index, Web of Science, and Dissertation Abstracts International. In addition, we checked the reference lists of articles identified for inclusion for additional studies and contacted key authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials if they evaluated a biologic intervention in people with rheumatoid arthritis and had self reported fatigue as an outcome measure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers selected relevant trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Where appropriate, we pooled data in meta-analyses using a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 32 studies for inclusion in this current review. Twenty studies evaluated five anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) biologic agents (adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab and infliximab), and 12 studies focused on five non-anti-TNF biologic agents (abatacept, canakinumab, rituximab, tocilizumab and an anti-interferon gamma monoclonal antibody). All but two of the studies were double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trials. In some trials, patients could receive concomitant disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). These studies added either biologics or placebo to DMARDs. Investigators did not change the dose of the latter from baseline. In total, these studies included 9946 participants in the intervention groups and 4682 participants in the control groups. Overall, quality of randomised controlled trials was moderate with a low to unclear risk of bias in the reporting of the outcome of fatigue. We downgraded the quality of the studies from high to moderate because of potential reporting bias (studies included post hoc analyses favouring reporting of positive result and did not always include all randomised individuals). Some studies recruited only participants with early disease. The studies used five different instruments to assess fatigue in these studies: the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Domain (FACIT-F), Short Form-36 Vitality Domain (SF-36 VT), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (0 to 100 or 0 to 10) and the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). We calculated standard mean differences for pooled data in meta-analyses. Overall treatment by biologic agents led to statistically significant reduction in fatigue with a standardised mean difference of -0.43 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.38 to -0.49). This equates to a difference of 6.45 units (95% CI 5.7 to 7.35) of FACIT-F score (range 0 to 52). Both types of biologic agents achieved a similar level of improvement: for anti-TNF agents, this stood at -0.42 (95% CI -0.35 to -0.49), equivalent to 6.3 units (95% CI 5.3 to 7.4) on the FACIT-F score; and for non-anti-TNF agents, it was -0.46 (95% CI -0.39 to -0.53), equivalent to 6.9 units (95% CI 5.85 to 7.95) on the FACIT-F score. In most studies, the double-blind period was 24 weeks or less. No study assessed long-term changes in fatigue. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with biologic interventions in patients with active RA can lead to a small to moderate improvement in fatigue. The magnitude of improvement is similar for anti-TNF and non-anti-TNF biologics. However, it is unclear whether the improvement results from a direct action of the biologics on fatigue or indirectly through reduction in inflammation, disease activity or some other mechanism.

Patient preferences for psychological support in inflammatory arthritis: a multicentre survey.

OBJECTIVES: Inflammatory arthritis (IA) can lead to anxiety, depression, pain and fatigue. Psychological support can improve quality of life and self-management; and European and American guidelines recommend support be offered. This study examined patient views on psychological support for their IA. METHODS: A questionnaire designed by researchers, patient partners and clinicians was administered to 2280 patients with IA. RESULTS: 1210 patients responded (53%): 74% women; mean age 59 years (SD 12.7); patient global 5 (2.3); disease duration <5 years (41%), 5-10 (20%), >10 (39%). Only 23% reported routinely being asked about social and emotional issues by a rheumatology professional, but 46% would like the opportunity to discuss psychological impact. If offered, 66% of patients reported they would use a self-management/coping clinic (63% pain management, 60% occupational therapy, 48% peer support groups, 46% patient education, 46% psychology/counselling). Patients want support with managing the impact of pain and fatigue (82%), managing emotions (57%), work and leisure (52%), relationships (37%) and depression (34%). Preferences are for support to be delivered by the rheumatology team (nurse 74%, doctor 55%) and general practitioners (GPs) (51%). Only 6% of patients stated that social and emotional issues were not relevant. CONCLUSIONS: Demand for psychological support is high; however, less than a quarter of patients reported being asked about social and emotional issues, suggesting a gap between needs and provision. The preference is for delivery from rheumatology clinicians and GPs, and research should establish whether they have the skills and resources to meet patients' needs.

Thermoregulatory effects of swaddling in Mongolia: a randomised controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate thermal balance of infants in a Mongolian winter, and compare the effects of traditional swaddling with an infant sleeping-bag in apartments or traditional tents (Gers). DESIGN: A substudy within a randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Community in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. SUBJECTS: A stratified randomly selected sample of 40 swaddled and 40 non-swaddled infants recruited within 48 h of birth. INTERVENTION: Sleeping-bags and baby outfits of total thermal resistance equivalent to that of swaddled babies. OUTCOME MEASURE: Digital recordings of infants' core, peripheral, environmental and microenvironmental temperatures at 30-s intervals over 24 h at ages 1 month and 3 months. RESULTS: In Gers, indoor temperatures varied greatly (<0->25°C), but remained between 20°C and 22°C, in apartments. Despite this, heavy wrapping, bed sharing and partial head covering, infant core and peripheral temperatures were similar and no infants showed evidence of significant heat or cold stress whether they were swaddled or in sleeping-bags. At 3 months, infants in sleeping-bags showed the 'mature' diurnal pattern of a fall in core temperature after sleep onset, accompanied by a rise in peripheral temperature, with a reverse pattern later in the night, just before awakening. This pattern was not related to room temperature, and was absent in the swaddled infants, suggesting that the mature diurnal pattern may develop later in them. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence of cold stress was found. Swaddling had no identifiable thermal advantages over sleeping-bags during the coldest times, and in centrally heated apartments could contribute to the risk of overheating during the daytime. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRTN01992617.

Remote ischaemic preconditioning versus sham procedure for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: an external feasibility randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in perioperative care, elective abdominal aorta aneurysm (AAA) repair carries significant morbidity and mortality. Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIC) is a physiological phenomenon whereby a brief episode of ischaemia-reperfusion protects against a subsequent longer ischaemic insult. Trials in cardiovascular surgery have shown that RIC can protect patients' organs during surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate whether RIC could be successfully introduced in elective AAA repair and to obtain the information needed to design a multi-centre RCT. METHODS: Consecutive patients presenting for elective AAA repair, using an endovascular (EVAR) or open procedure, in a single large city hospital in the UK were assessed for trial eligibility. Patients who consented to participate were randomized to receive RIC (three cycles of 5 min ischaemia followed by 5 min reperfusion in the upper arm immediately before surgery) or a sham procedure. Patients were followed up for 6 months. We assessed eligibility and consent rates, the logistics of RIC implementation, randomization, blinding, data capture, patient and staff opinion, and variability and frequency of clinical outcome measures. RESULTS: Between January 2010 and December 2012, 98 patients were referred for AAA repair, 93 were screened, 85 (91%) were eligible, 70 were approached for participation and 69 consented to participate; 34 were randomized to RIC and 35 to the sham procedure. There was a greater than expected variation in the complexity of EVAR that impacted the outcomes. Acute kidney injury occurred in 28 (AKIN 1: 23%; AKIN 2: 15% and AKIN 3: 3%) and 7 (10%) had a perioperative myocardial infarction. Blinding was successful, and interviews with participants and staff indicated that the procedure was acceptable. There were no adverse events secondary to the intervention in the 6 months following the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided essential information for the planning and design of a multi-centre RCT to assess effectiveness of RIC for improving clinical outcomes in elective AAA repair. Patient consent was high, and the RIC intervention was carried out with minimal disruption to clinical care. The allocation scheme for a definite trial should take into account both the surgical procedure and its complexity to avoid confounding the effect of the RIC, as was observed in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN19332276 (date of registration: 16 March 2012). The trial protocol is available from the corresponding author.

Stiffness is more than just duration and severity: a qualitative exploration in people with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Stiffness is internationally recognized as an important indicator of inflammatory activity in RA but is poorly understood and difficult to measure. The aim of this study was to explore the experience of stiffness from the patient perspective. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews conducted with 16 RA patients were analysed independently by researchers and pat.ient partners using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Six themes were identified. Part of having RA identified stiffness as a normal consequence of RA, perceived as associated with disease-related aspects such as fluctuating disease activity, other RA symptoms and disease duration. Local and widespread highlighted stiffness occurring not only in joints, but also over the whole body, being more widespread during the morning or flare. Linked to behaviour and environment illustrated factors that influence stiffness, including movement, medications and weather. Highly variable captured the fluctuating nature of stiffness within and between patients and in relation to temporality, duration and intensity. Impacts on daily life emphasized the effect of stiffness on a range of domains, including physical function, quality of life, psychological well-being, activities of daily living and participation in work and leisure activities. Requires self-management detailed self-management strategies targeting both the symptom and its consequences. CONCLUSION: Patients' experiences of stiffness were varied, complex and not exclusive to the morning period. Importantly, stiffness was reported in terms of impact rather than the traditional measurement concepts of severity or duration. Based on these findings, further research is needed to develop a patient-centred measure that adequately reflects inflammatory activity.

A Q-methodology study of flare help-seeking behaviours and different experiences of daily life in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have not addressed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients' help-seeking behaviours for RA flares, and only one small qualitative study has addressed how patients experience daily life on current treatment regimes. Thus, this study aims to identify clusters of opinion related to RA patients' experiences of daily life on current treatments, and their help-seeking behaviours for RA flares. METHODS: Using Q-methodology (a methodology using qualitative and quantitative methods to sort people according to subjective experience), two separate studies were conducted with the same sample of RA patients (mean age 55, 73% female). Thirty participants sorted 39 statements about daily life (Q-study 1) and 29 participants separately sorted 23 statements about flare help-seeking (Q-study 2). Data were examined using Q-factor analysis. RESULTS: Daily life with RA (Q-study 1): Three factors relating to the experience of living with RA were extracted and explained. Patients belonging to Factor A (mean age 62, 86% female) use effective self-management techniques to control the daily impact of RA. Those in Factor B (mean age 55, 75% male) struggle to self-manage and cope. Whilst patients in Factor C (mean age 42, 100% female) prioritise life responsibilities over their RA, reporting less impact.Flare help-seeking (Q-study 2): Two factors explaining the experience of flare help-seeking (unrelated to the factors from Q-study 1) were extracted and explained. Factor X (68.8% on biologics) reported seeking help quickly, believing the medical team is there to help. Factor Y (0% on biologics) delay help-seeking, concerned about wasting the rheumatologist's time, believing they should manage alone. All participants agreed they sought help due to intense pain and persistent, unmanageable symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with different characteristics appear to manage RA life in different ways and men may struggle more than women. Whilst all patients are prompted to seek help by persistent, unmanageable symptoms, some delay help-seeking. Further research is needed to quantify the severity of daily symptoms, the level of symptoms needed for patients to define themselves as in flare and to understand the support needs of RA men.

A survey of psychological support provision for people with inflammatory arthritis in secondary care in England.

OBJECTIVES: The consequences of inflammatory arthritis can include depression, anxiety and low mood, reducing patients' quality of life and increasing pressure on the healthcare system. Treatment guidelines recommend psychological support, but data are lacking on the provision available. METHODS: A postal survey concerning psychological support provision was sent to rheumatology units in 143 acute trusts across England. Nurses from 73 rheumatology units (51%) responded. RESULTS: Overall, 73% rated their unit's psychological support provision as 'inadequate' and only 4% rated it as 'good'. Few units believed that psychological support did not fall within their remit (12%), yet only 8% had a psychologist in the team. Most units (68%) did not routinely screen patients to identify psychological difficulties. Referral to other service providers was reported in 42% of units, with 3% very satisfied with this provision. Within units, services containing elements of psychological support ranged from occupational therapy (81%) to psychology/counselling (14%). Psychological approaches used by team members ranged from shared decision making (77%) to cognitive-behavioural approaches (26%). The current barriers to providing psychological support were lack of clinical time and available training (86% and 74%, respectively), and delivery costs (74%). Future facilitators included management support (74%) and availability of skills training (74%). CONCLUSIONS: Rheumatology units viewed psychological support provision as part of their remit but rated their overall provision as inadequate, despite some team members using psychological skills. To improve provision, clinicians' training needs must be addressed and organizational support generated, and further research needs to define adequate psychological support provision from the patient perspective.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as an adjunct to education and exercise for knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the additional effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) when combined with a group education and exercise program (knee group). METHODS: The study was a randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial. Patients referred for physiotherapy with suspected knee OA (confirmed using the American College of Rheumatology clinical criteria) were invited. Exclusion criteria included comorbidities preventing exercise, previous TENS experience, and TENS contraindications. Prospective sample size calculations required 67 participants in each trial arm. A total of 224 participants (mean age 61 years, 37% men) were randomized to 3 arms: TENS and knee group (n = 73), sham TENS and knee group (n = 74), and knee group (n = 77). All patients entered an evidence-based 6-week group education and exercise program (knee group). Active TENS produced a "strong but comfortable" paraesthesia within the painful area and was used as much as needed during the 6-week period. Sham TENS used dummy devices with no electrical output. Blinded assessment took place at baseline and 3, 6, 12, and 24 weeks. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function subscale at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC pain, stiffness, and total scores; extensor muscle torque; global assessment of change; exercise adherence; and exercise self-efficacy. Data analysis was by intent to treat. RESULTS: All outcomes improved over time (P < 0.05), but there were no differences between trial arms (P > 0.05). All improvements were maintained at 24-week followup. CONCLUSION: There were no additional benefits of TENS, failing to support its use as a treatment adjunct within this context.

Non-pharmacological interventions for fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a common and potentially distressing symptom for people with rheumatoid arthritis with no accepted evidence based management guidelines. Non-pharmacological interventions, such as physical activity and psychosocial interventions, have been shown to help people with a range of other long-term conditions to manage subjective fatigue. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefit and harm of non-pharmacological interventions for the management of fatigue in people with rheumatoid arthritis. This included any intervention that was not classified as pharmacological in accordance with European Union (EU) Directive 2001/83/EEC. SEARCH METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched up to October 2012, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; AMED; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Social Science Citation Index; Web of Science; Dissertation Abstracts International; Current Controlled Trials Register; The National Research Register Archive; The UKCRN Portfolio Database. In addition, reference lists of articles identified for inclusion were checked for additional studies and key authors were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials were included if they evaluated a non-pharmacological intervention in people with rheumatoid arthritis with self-reported fatigue as an outcome measure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors selected relevant trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Where appropriate, data were pooled using meta-analysis with a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2882 participants with rheumatoid arthritis. Included studies investigated physical activity interventions (n = 6 studies; 388 participants), psychosocial interventions (n = 13 studies; 1579 participants), herbal medicine (n = 1 study; 58 participants), omega-3 fatty acid supplementation (n = 1 study; 81 participants), Mediterranean diet (n = 1 study; 51 participants), reflexology (n = 1 study; 11 participants) and the provision of Health Tracker information (n = 1 study; 714 participants). Physical activity was statistically significantly more effective than the control at the end of the intervention period (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.62 to -0.10; back translated to mean difference of 14.4 points lower, 95% CI -4.0 to -24.8 on a 100 point scale where a lower score means less fatigue; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 7, 95% CI 4 to 26) demonstrating a small beneficial effect upon fatigue. Psychosocial intervention was statistically significantly more effective than the control at the end of the intervention period (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.07; back translated to mean difference of 9.6 points lower, 95% CI -2.8 to -16.0 on a 100 point scale, lower score means less fatigue; NNTB 10, 95% CI 6 to 33) demonstrating a small beneficial effect upon fatigue. For the remaining interventions meta-analysis was not possible and there was either no statistically significant difference between trial arms or findings were not reported. Only three studies reported any adverse events and none of these were serious, however, it is possible that the low incidence was in part due to poor reporting. The quality of the evidence ranged from moderate quality for physical activity interventions and Mediterranean diet to low quality for psychosocial interventions and all other interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides some evidence that physical activity and psychosocial interventions provide benefit in relation to self-reported fatigue in adults with rheumatoid arthritis. There is currently insufficient evidence of the effectiveness of other non-pharmacological interventions.

Exercise and self-management for people with chronic knee, hip or lower back pain: a cluster randomised controlled trial of clinical and cost-effectiveness. Study protocol.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic musculoskeletal pain and osteoarthritis can significantly limit the functional independence of individuals, and given that 25% of the population experience these problems, the socioeconomic impact is immense. Exercise and self-management have proven benefits for these conditions, but most trials tailor interventions for specific joints. Epidemiological data demonstrates that many older people with degenerative joint problems experience pain and functional difficulty in other joints, seeking further healthcare input when these present. Managing multiple joint presentations simultaneously could potentially reduce the need for repeat visits to healthcare professionals as advice is frequently the same for differing site presentations. This single-blind cluster randomised controlled trial will determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an exercise and self-management intervention delivered to people over-50 with either hip, knee or lower back pain, compared to 'standard' GP care. A qualitative analysis will also establish the acceptability of the intervention. METHODS: 352 people with chronic degenerative musculoskeletal pain of the hip, knee or lower back will be recruited from primary care. GP surgeries will be randomised to either the intervention or control arms. Participants in the intervention arm will receive a 6-week group exercise and self-management programme facilitated by a physiotherapist in primary care. Participants allocated to the control arm will continue under 'standard' GP care. The primary outcome measure is the Dysfunction Index of the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA). ANALYSIS: Individual patient responses will be modelled using a mixed effects linear regression, allowing for the clustering effects. Resource use and related intervention costs will be estimated and broader resource use data will be collected using a version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory adapted for musculoskeletal relevance. In addition, a cost-utility analysis will be undertaken to present an estimate of the incremental cost per QALY. A qualitative analysis investigating the acceptability of the intervention to participants and healthcare professionals will also be undertaken and thematically analysed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was received from South West 4 REC, identification number 11/SW/0053. Study findings will be disseminated via conference and journal presentation; via arthritis charitable organisations; and through local GP consortia.

Self-management of fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised controlled trial of group cognitive-behavioural therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for fatigue self-management, compared with groups receiving fatigue information alone, on fatigue impact among people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Two-arm, parallel randomised controlled trial in adults with RA, fatigue ≥ 6/10 (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 0-10, high bad) and no recent change in RA medication. Group CBT for fatigue self-management comprised six (weekly) 2 h sessions, and consolidation session (week 14). Control participants received fatigue self-management information in a 1 h didactic group session. Primary outcome at 18 weeks was the impact of fatigue measured using two methods (Multi-dimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) 0-50; VAS 0-10), analysed using intention-to-treat analysis of covariance with multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Of 168 participants randomised, 41 withdrew before entry and 127 participated. There were no major baseline differences between the 65 CBT and 62 control participants. At 18 weeks CBT participants reported better scores than control participants for fatigue impact: MAF 28.99 versus 23.99 (adjusted difference -5.48, 95% CI -9.50 to -1.46, p=0.008); VAS 5.99 versus 4.26 (adjusted difference -1.95, 95% CI -2.99 to -0.90, p<0.001). Standardised effect sizes for fatigue impact were MAF 0.59 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.03) and VAS 0.77 (95% CI 0.33 to 1.21), both in favour of CBT. Secondary outcomes of perceived fatigue severity, coping, disability, depression, helplessness, self-efficacy and sleep were also better in CBT participants. CONCLUSIONS: Group CBT for fatigue self-management in RA improves fatigue impact, coping and perceived severity, and well-being. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 32195100.

Monitoring Change in Families Receiving Primary Mental Health Specialist Services: A Pragmatic Evaluation Within an Existing Service for the Under-Fives.

BACKGROUND: Specialist CAMHS-based services for pre-school age children are being introduced in the UK using different models of care. The clinical value of these new services requires assessment. METHOD:   Over 20 months a Primary Mental Health Specialist (Under 5s) service operating in South West UK was evaluated on a variety of themes including effectiveness. Recruited clients completed questionnaires on their own well-being (on two occasions) and their child's behaviour (on three occasions) over the intervention period. RESULTS: Of the 67 carers assessed at or shortly after recruitment using the General Health Questionnaire, 55.2% were at high risk of having a clinically significant affective mental condition. Despite a trend towards improvement, neither the GHQ-12 total score nor the proportion meeting the clinical criterion was statistically significantly reduced. The main index of child behaviour and emotional state demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the number of disturbance-indicating behaviours over the service intervention period. The largest changes occurred between recruitment and the 4th visit. Selection bias cannot be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Significant changes determined over a relatively short period of intervention is consistent with an effect of service, but direct attribution demands care as no control groups were included.

Alternatives to inpatient mental health care for children and young people.

BACKGROUND: Current policy in the UK and elsewhere places emphasis on the provision of mental health services in the least restrictive setting, whilst also recognising that some children will require inpatient care. As a result, there are a range of mental health services to manage young people with serious mental health problems who are at risk of being admitted to an inpatient unit in community or outpatient settings. OBJECTIVES: 1. To assess the effectiveness, acceptability and cost of mental health services that provide an alternative to inpatient care for children and young people. 2. To identify the range and prevalence of different models of service that seek to avoid inpatient care for children and young people. SEARCH STRATEGY: Our search included the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Specialised Register (2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to 2007), EMBASE (1982 to 2006), the British Nursing Index (1994 to 2006), RCN database (1985 to 1996), CINAHL (1982 to 2006) and PsycInfo (1972 to 2007). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of mental health services providing specialist care, beyond the scope of generic outpatient provision, as an alternative to inpatient mental health care, for children or adolescents aged from five to 18 years who have a serious mental health condition requiring specialist services beyond the capacity of generic outpatient provision. The control group received mental health services in an inpatient or equivalent setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. We grouped studies according to the intervention type but did not pool data because of differences in the interventions and measures of outcome. Where data were available we calculated confidence intervals (CIs) for differences between groups at follow up. We also calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs for each outcome in terms of mean change from baseline to follow up using the follow-up SDs. We calculated SMDs (taking into account the direction of change and the scoring of each instrument) so that negative SMDs indicate results that favour treatment and positive SMDs favour the control group. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven randomised controlled trials (recruiting a total of 799 participants) evaluating four distinct models of care: multi-systemic therapy (MST) at home, specialist outpatient service, intensive home treatment and intensive home-based crisis intervention ('Homebuilders' model for crisis intervention). Young people receiving home-based MST experienced some improved functioning in terms of externalising symptoms and they spent fewer days out of school and out-of-home placement. At short term follow up the control group had a greater improvement in terms of adaptability and cohesion; this was not sustained at four months follow up. There were small, significant patient improvements reported in both groups in the trial evaluating the intensive home-based crisis intervention using the 'Homebuilders' model. No differences at follow up were reported in the two trials evaluating intensive home treatment, or in the trials evaluating specialist outpatient services. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the evidence base currently provides very little guidance for the development of services. If randomised controlled trials are not feasible then consideration should be given to alternative study designs, such as prospective systems of audit conducted across several centres, as this has the potential to improve the current level of evidence. These studies should include baseline measurement at admission along with demographic data, and outcomes measured using a few standardised robust instruments.