Evidence for the use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis: a scoping review.

The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review to describe the evidence on the efficacy and safety of using cannabis-based medicines for osteoarthritis. The review was conducted following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and reported following PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive search across various databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, and Proquest, spanning from inception of each database to March 2023. We retrieved 2533 citations, and after deduplication, title and abstract screening, and full-text screening, 10 articles were included for analysis. These studies were composed of randomized-controlled trials (n = 4/10), cross-sectional surveys (n = 3/10), case studies (n = 2/10), and a cohort study (n = 1/10). Evidence for using cannabis-based medicines was mixed, with just 60% (n = 6/10) of included studies reporting statistically significant improvements in pain. Studies with larger samples sizes and longer durations of exposure did not find significant benefits for pain. The few adverse effects reported were generally mild and affected a minority of participants. Several studies also discovered that cannabis-based medicines were associated with a reduction in opioid use. Currently available data on the use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis is insufficient to make recommendations. Future research should address concerns regarding small sample sizes and short treatment durations to provide a more robust evidence base. Key Points • Current evidence remains mixed; studies that found a positive benefit with using cannabis-based medicines had limitations with small sample sizes and short durations of exposure • The use of cannabis-based medicines in osteoarthritis appears to be generally well tolerated, adverse effects are mild and experienced by a minority of participants • Cannabis-based medicines may decrease the use of opioids in patients with osteoarthritis • Future research should address the gaps in long-term efficacy and safety data.

An Overview of Reviews to Inform Organization-Level Interventions to Address Burnout in Rheumatologists.

OBJECTIVE: To identify organization-directed strategies that could be implemented to prevent burnout among rheumatologists. METHODS: A search of English language articles published 2011 or later was conducted on Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Medline, and PsycInfo on January 25, 2022. Included reviews had ≥ 1 primary studies with ≥ 10% of participants who were physicians, recorded burnout as an outcome, and described an organization-directed intervention to prevent burnout. Overlap of primary studies across reviews was assessed. The final review inclusion was determined by study quality, minimization of overlap, and maximization of intervention breadth. The A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool was used for quality assessment. Included studies and interventions were assessed by rheumatologists for their applicability to rheumatology. RESULTS: A total of 17 reviews, including 15 systematic reviews, 1 realist review, and 1 umbrella review were included. AMSTAR 2 quality ratings classified 5 systematic reviews as low quality, 1 as moderate, and 9 as critically low. There was significant heterogeneity between and within reviews. Six conducted a metaanalysis and 11 provided a qualitative summary of findings. The following intervention types were identified as having possible applicability to rheumatology: physician workflow and organizational strategies; peer support and formal communication training; leadership support; and addressing stress, mental health, and mindfulness. Across interventions, mindfulness had the highest quality of evidence to support its effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Although the quality of evidence for interventions to prevent burnout in physicians is low, promising strategies such as mindfulness have been identified.

COVID-19 Vaccination Perceptions in Patients With Rheumatic Disease: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the factors that affect coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine decision making among individuals diagnosed with a rheumatologic condition, given that previous international studies have demonstrated that a significant proportion of patients with rheumatic disease (RD) are vaccine hesitant. METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved an online survey with adult patients with RD from the Kaye Edmonton Clinic Rheumatology Clinic between June and August 2021. Quantitative results were descriptively analyzed, whereas qualitative thematic analysis was conducted for open-ended responses. RESULTS: The survey had a response rate of 70.9% (N = 231). Regarding COVID-19 vaccines, patients with RD were most concerned about the possible effect of vaccination on their rheumatic condition (45.2%) and about vaccine effectiveness (45.1%). Most patients had discussed COVID-19 vaccination (75.9%) and its risks and benefits (66.1%) with their medical team, and 83.6% of respondents were confident in the information provided. Patients' perceptions of the government's role in handling the COVID-19 pandemic varied: 33% reported that they found government-instituted public health measures effective. Surprisingly, 9.7% of patients with RD still reported concerns that they could develop COVID-19 from an approved COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: This study describes factors implicated in COVID-19 vaccine decision making among patients with RD. Three important themes included possible adverse effects of the vaccine on RD control, reduced vaccine efficacy because of RD/treatment, and risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 from the COVID-19 vaccine. Knowledge from this study can assist healthcare providers in looking after patients with RD to initiate discussions with patients to share evidence-based vaccine information and assist with informed decision making.

Results From the 2020 Canadian Rheumatology Association's Workforce and Wellness Survey.

OBJECTIVE: The Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) launched the Workforce and Wellness Survey to update the Canadian rheumatology workforce characteristics. METHODS: The survey included demographic and practice information, pandemic effects, and the Mini Z survey to assess burnout. French and English survey versions were distributed to CRA members electronically between October 14, 2020, and March 5, 2021. The number of full-time equivalent (FTE) rheumatologists per 75,000 population was estimated from the median proportion of time in clinical practice multiplied by provincial rheumatologist numbers from the Canadian Medical Association. RESULTS: Forty-four percent (183/417) of the estimated practicing rheumatologists (149 adult; 34 pediatric) completed the survey. The median age was 47 years, 62% were female, and 28% planned to retire within the next 5-10 years. Respondents spent a median of 65% of their time in clinical practice. FTE rheumatologists per 75,000 population were 0.62 nationally and ranged between 0.00 and 0.70 in each province/territory. This represents a deficit of 1-78 FTE rheumatologists per province/territory and 194 FTE rheumatologists nationally to meet the CRA's workforce benchmark. Approximately half of survey respondents reported burnout (51%). Women were more likely to report burnout (OR 2.86, 95% CI 1.42-5.93). Older age was protective against burnout (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99). As a result of the pandemic, 97% of rheumatologists reported spending more time engaged in virtual care. CONCLUSION: There is a shortage of rheumatologists in Canada. This shortage may be compounded by the threat of burnout to workforce retention and productivity. Strategies to address these workforce issues are needed urgently.

Conversion rates of abstracts presented at the Canadian Rheumatology Association Annual Meetings into full-text journal articles.

Dissemination of research studies is important for research ideas to be transformed from initial abstracts to full publications. Analyses of the scientific impact and publication record of the Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) Annual meeting have not been previously described. This study determines the publication rate of abstracts presented at the CRA Annual Meetings 2005-2013 to full-text journal articles and the factors associated with publication. Program records of previous CRA meetings from 2005 to 2013 were obtained. Abstracts were searched for corresponding full-text publication in Google Scholar and PubMed using a search algorithm. Abstracts and subsequent published articles were evaluated for type of abstract, time to publication, study type, publishing journal, and journal impact factor. A total of 1401 abstracts were included in the study, 567 of which were converted to full publications. The average time to publication was 19.7 months, with 89% of abstracts published within 3 years of being presented. Eighty-three percent of abstracts were clinical in nature, and 58% of published studies were observational in design. Articles were published in a wide range of journals, with the top publisher being the Journal of Rheumatology (31%). Average time to publication was 19.7 months. Eighty-six percent of articles had a Journal Impact Factor > 2. Overall, 40.5% of abstracts presented at the CRA Annual Meetings 2005-2013 were published. Further research is needed to determine barriers and reasons for abstracts not being published as full-text articles.

Stand Up and Be Counted: Measuring and Mapping the Rheumatology Workforce in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the practicing rheumatologist workforce, the Canadian Rheumatology Association (CRA) launched the Stand Up and Be Counted workforce survey in 2015. METHODS: The survey was distributed electronically to 695 individuals, of whom 519 were expected to be practicing rheumatologists. Demographic and practice information were elicited. We estimated the number of full-time equivalent rheumatologists per 75,000 population from the median proportion of time devoted to clinical practice multiplied by provincial rheumatologist numbers from the Canadian Medical Association. RESULTS: The response rate was 68% (355/519) of expected practicing rheumatologists (304 were in adult practice, and 51 pediatric). The median age was 50 years, and one-third planned to retire within the next 5-10 years. The majority (81%) were university-affiliated. Rheumatologists spent a median of 70% of their time in clinical practice, holding 6 half-day clinics weekly, with 10 new consultations and 45 followups seen per week. Work characteristics varied by type of rheumatologist (adult or pediatric) and by practice setting (community- or university-based). We estimated between 0 and 0.8 full-time rheumatologists per 75,000 population in each province. This represents a deficit of 1 to 77 full-time rheumatologists per province/territory to meet the CRA recommendation of 1 rheumatologist per 75,000 population, depending on the province/territory. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight a current shortage of rheumatologists in Canada that may worsen in the next 10 years because one-third of the workforce plans to retire. Efforts to encourage trainees to enter rheumatology and strategies to support retention are critical to address the shortage.

Attracting internal medicine trainees to rheumatology: where and when programs should focus efforts.

OBJECTIVE: To determine where and when efforts should be focused to increase recruitment of rheumatology trainees from internal medicine (IM) programs. METHODS: (1) We calculated the percentage of trainees at each of the 13 English-speaking Canadian IM-accredited programs who entered a rheumatology training program in Canada from 2005 to 2007. We then correlated this with the opportunity they would have had to do a rheumatology rotation in each of their 3 postgraduate years of IM training. (2) We calculated the overall percentage of residents who remained at the same training institution after their IM program, 2005-2007, comparing this to 4 similar-size subspecialty training programs. RESULTS: Among IM trainees, 3.5% began rheumatology training in Canada. There was a positive relationship at the postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) level between more rheumatology opportunities and chance of entering rheumatology (r(2) = 0.35, p < 0.05), but not at the PGY2 or PGY3 level. Among rheumatology trainees, 78% remained at the training institution where they completed IM training, more than the 70% of gastroenterology trainees, 68% of nephrology trainees, 67% of endocrinology trainees, and 76% of infectious diseases trainees. CONCLUSION: The opportunity for a rheumatology rotation in the first year of IM training increases the likelihood the trainee may choose rheumatology as a career. Further, most rheumatology trainees continue at the same institution as their IM training, more than other subspecialties. This information may assist recruitment efforts to increase numbers of rheumatology trainees and the overall rheumatology workforce. These data warrant reevaluation of IM programs of study in order to influence trainee career choices and plan better for future workforce requirements in all IM fields.

Immunological diagnosis of cutaneous-pulmonary hypersensitivity vasculitis.

A 47-year-old woman had episodic dyspnoea, fatigue, chest radiograph opacifications, and palpable purpura whose biopsy showed leucocytoclastic vasculitis. Negative immunoglobulin A immunofluorescence staining and clinical exclusion of other disorders narrowed her diagnosis to cutaneous pulmonary hypersensitivity vasculitis.