Prognostic factors for colchicine prophylaxis-related adverse events when initiating allopurinol for gout: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Colchicine is commonly used to prevent flares when starting urate-lowering therapy for gout. Patients with gout are frequently concurrently prescribed other medications (such as statins) that may interact with colchicine, increasing the risk of adverse events. The aim of this study was to describe potential prognostic factors for adverse events in patients prescribed colchicine when initiating allopurinol. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in linked UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics datasets. Adults initiating allopurinol for gout with colchicine (01/04/1997-30/11/2016) were included. Potential prognostic factors were defined, and the likelihood of adverse events, including diarrhoea, nausea or vomiting, myocardial infarction (MI), neuropathy, myalgia, myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, and bone marrow suppression, were estimated. RESULTS: From 01/04/1997-30/11/2016, 13 945 people with gout initiated allopurinol with colchicine prophylaxis (mean age 63.9 (SD 14.7) years, 78.2% male). One quarter (26%, 95% CI 25% to 27%) were prescribed ≥1 potentially interacting medicines, most commonly statins (21%, 95% CI 20% to 22%). Statins were not associated with increased adverse events, although other drugs were associated with some adverse outcomes. Diarrhoea and MI were associated with more comorbidities and more severe CKD. CONCLUSION: People were given colchicine prophylaxis despite commonly having preexisting prescriptions for medications with potential to interact with colchicine. Adverse events were more common in people who had more comorbidities and certain potentially interacting medications. Our findings will provide much-needed information about prognostic factors for colchicine-related adverse events that can inform treatment decisions about prophylaxis when initiating allopurinol.

Talking in primary care (TIP): protocol for a cluster-randomised controlled trial in UK primary care to assess clinical and cost-effectiveness of communication skills e-learning for practitioners on patients' musculoskeletal pain and enablement.

INTRODUCTION: Effective communication can help optimise healthcare interactions and patient outcomes. However, few interventions have been tested clinically, subjected to cost-effectiveness analysis or are sufficiently brief and well-described for implementation in primary care. This paper presents the protocol for determining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a rigorously developed brief eLearning tool, EMPathicO, among patients with and without musculoskeletal pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised controlled trial in general practitioner (GP) surgeries in England and Wales serving patients from diverse geographic, socioeconomic and ethnic backgrounds. GP surgeries are randomised (1:1) to receive EMPathicO e-learning immediately, or at trial end. Eligible practitioners (eg, GPs, physiotherapists and nurse practitioners) are involved in managing primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain. Patient recruitment is managed by practice staff and researchers. Target recruitment is 840 adults with and 840 without musculoskeletal pain consulting face-to-face, by telephone or video. Patients complete web-based questionnaires at preconsultation baseline, 1 week and 1, 3 and 6 months later. There are two patient-reported primary outcomes: pain intensity and patient enablement. Cost-effectiveness is considered from the National Health Service and societal perspectives. Secondary and process measures include practitioner patterns of use of EMPathicO, practitioner-reported self-efficacy and intentions, patient-reported symptom severity, quality of life, satisfaction, perceptions of practitioner empathy and optimism, treatment expectancies, anxiety, depression and continuity of care. Purposive subsamples of patients, practitioners and practice staff take part in up to two qualitative, semistructured interviews. ETHICS APPROVAL AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by the South Central Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee on 1 July 2022 and the Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales on 6 July 2022 (REC reference 22/SC/0145; IRAS project ID 312208). Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed academic publications, conference presentations and patient and practitioner outlets. If successful, EMPathicO could quickly be made available at a low cost to primary care practices across the country. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18010240.

Safety of colchicine and NSAID prophylaxis when initiating urate-lowering therapy for gout: propensity score-matched cohort studies in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of adverse events associated with colchicine or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) prophylaxis when initiating allopurinol for gout. METHODS: We conducted two matched retrospective cohort studies in linked UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics datasets. Adults initiating allopurinol for gout with (1) colchicine or (2) NSAID prophylaxis were compared with those initiating without prophylaxis, individually matched by age, sex and propensity to receive the relevant prophylaxis. Weighted Cox proportional hazards models investigated associations between colchicine/NSAID and specified adverse events. RESULTS: 13 945 individuals prescribed colchicine were matched to 13 945 with no prophylaxis and 25 980 prescribed NSAID to 25 980 with no prophylaxis. Adverse event incidence rates were <200/10 000 patient-years except diarrhoea (784.4; 95% CI 694.0 to 886.5) and nausea (208.1; 95% CI 165.4 to 261.7) for colchicine and angina for NSAID (466.6; 95% CI 417.2 to 521.8). Diarrhoea (HR 2.22; 95% CI 1.83 to 2.69), myocardial infarction (MI) (1.55; 95% CI 1.10, 2.17), neuropathy (4.75; 95% CI 1.20 to 18.76), myalgia (2.64; 95% CI 1.45 to 4.81), bone marrow suppression (3.29; 95% CI 1.43 to 7.58) and any adverse event (1.91, 95% CI 1.65 to 2.20) were more common with colchicine than no prophylaxis, but not nausea/vomiting (1.34; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.85). Angina (1.60; 95% CI 1.37 to 1.86), acute kidney injury (1.56; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.03), MI (1.89; 95% CI 1.44 to 2.48), peptic ulcer disease (1.67; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.44) and any adverse event (1.63; 95% CI 1.44 to 1.85) were more common with NSAID than without. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events were more common when allopurinol was initiated with prophylaxis, particularly diarrhoea with colchicine. Other events were uncommon, providing reassurance for patients and clinicians to enable shared decision-making.

Determining cardiovascular risk in patients with unattributed chest pain in UK primary care: an electronic health record study.

AIMS: Most adults presenting in primary care with chest pain symptoms will not receive a diagnosis ('unattributed' chest pain) but are at increased risk of cardiovascular events. To assess within patients with unattributed chest pain, risk factors for cardiovascular events and whether those at greatest risk of cardiovascular disease can be ascertained by an existing general population risk prediction model or by development of a new model. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study used UK primary care electronic health records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to admitted hospitalizations. Study population was patients aged 18 plus with recorded unattributed chest pain 2002-2018. Cardiovascular risk prediction models were developed with external validation and comparison of performance to QRISK3, a general population risk prediction model. There were 374 917 patients with unattributed chest pain in the development data set. The strongest risk factors for cardiovascular disease included diabetes, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. Risk was increased in males, patients of Asian ethnicity, those in more deprived areas, obese patients, and smokers. The final developed model had good predictive performance (external validation c-statistic 0.81, calibration slope 1.02). A model using a subset of key risk factors for cardiovascular disease gave nearly identical performance. QRISK3 underestimated cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSION: Patients presenting with unattributed chest pain are at increased risk of cardiovascular events. It is feasible to accurately estimate individual risk using routinely recorded information in the primary care record, focusing on a small number of risk factors. Patients at highest risk could be targeted for preventative measures.

It is known that patients with chest pain without a recognized cause are at increased risk of future cardiovascular events (for example, heart disease) and so this study aimed to find out whether those patients at greatest risk could be determined using information in their health records. It is possible to accurately estimate a person's risk of future cardiovascular events using the information entered into their health records, and this risk can be estimated using only a small number of factors.Patients at highest risk could now be targeted for management to help prevent future cardiovascular events.

Long-Term Cardiovascular Risk and Management of Patients Recorded in Primary Care With Unattributed Chest Pain: An Electronic Health Record Study.

Background Most adults presenting with chest pain will not receive a diagnosis and be recorded with unattributed chest pain. The objective was to assess if they have increased risk of cardiovascular disease compared with those with noncoronary chest pain and determine whether investigations and interventions are targeted at those at highest risk. Methods and Results We used records from general practices in England linked to hospitalization and mortality information. The study population included patients aged 18 years or over with a new record of chest pain with a noncoronary cause or unattributed between 2002 and 2018, and no cardiovascular disease recorded up to 6 months (diagnostic window) afterward. We compared risk of a future cardiovascular event by type of chest pain, adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors and alternative explanations for chest pain. We determined prevalence of cardiac diagnostic investigations and preventative medication during the diagnostic window in patients with estimated cardiovascular risk ≥10%. There were 375 240 patients with unattributed chest pain (245 329 noncoronary chest pain). There was an increased risk of cardiovascular events for patients with unattributed chest pain, highest in the first year (hazard ratio, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.21-1.29]), persistent up to 10 years. Patients with unattributed chest pain had consistently increased risk of myocardial infarction over time but no increased risk of stroke. Thirty percent of patients at higher risk were prescribed lipid-lowering medication. Conclusions Patients presenting to primary care with unattributed chest pain are at increased risk of cardiovascular events. Primary prevention to reduce cardiovascular events appears suboptimal in those at higher risk.

Acute Myocardial Infarction in Autoimmune Rheumatologic Disease: A Nationwide Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Predictors of Management Strategy.

OBJECTIVES: To examine national-level differences in management strategies and outcomes in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRD) with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from 2004 through 2014. METHODS: All AMI hospitalizations were analyzed from the National Inpatient Sample, stratified according to AIRD diagnosis into 4 groups: no AIRD, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and systemic sclerosis (SSC). The associations between AIRD subtypes and (1) receipt of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and (2) clinical outcomes were examined compared with patients without AIRD. RESULTS: Of 6,747,797 AMI hospitalizations, 109,983 patients (1.6%) had an AIRD diagnosis (RA: 1.3%, SLE: 0.3%, and SSC: 0.1%). The prevalence of RA rose from 1.0% (2004) to 1.5% (2014), and SLE and SSC remained stable. Patients with SLE were less likely to receive invasive management (odds ratio [OR] [95% CI]: coronary angiography-0.87; 0.84 to 0.91; PCI-0.93; 0.90 to 0.96), whereas no statistically significant differences were found in the RA and SSC groups. Subsequently, the ORs (95% CIs) of mortality (1.15; 1.07 to 1.23) and bleeding (1.24; 1.16 to 1.31) were increased in patients with SLE; SSC was associated with increased ORs (95% CIs) of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (1.52; 1.38 to 1.68) and mortality (1.81; 1.62 to 2.02) but not bleeding or stroke; the RA group was at no increased risk for any complication. CONCLUSION: In a nationwide cohort of AMI hospitalizations we found lower use of invasive management in patients with SLE and worse outcomes after AMI in patients with SLE and SSC compared with those without AIRD.

Interstitial lung disease is a risk factor for ischaemic heart disease and myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: Despite many shared risk factors and pathophysiological pathways, the risk of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) and myocardial infarction (MI) in interstitial lung disease (ILD) remains poorly understood. This lack of data could be preventing patients who may benefit from screening for these cardiovascular diseases from receiving it. METHODS: A population-based cohort study used electronic patient records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and linked Hospital Episode Statistics to identify 68 572 patients (11 688 ILD exposed (mean follow-up: 3.8 years); 56 884 unexposed controls (mean follow-up: 4.0 years), with 349 067 person-years of follow-up. ILD-exposed patients (pulmonary sarcoidosis (PS) or idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (PF)) were matched (by age, sex, registered general practice and available follow-up time) to patients without ILD or IHD/MI. Rates of incident MI and IHD were estimated. HRs were modelled using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression accounting for potential confounders. RESULTS: ILD was independently associated with IHD (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.18) and MI (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.11). In all disease categories, risk of both IHD and MI peaked between ages 60 and 69 years, except for the risk of MI in PS which was greatest <50 years. Men with PF were at greatest risk of IHD, while women with PF were at greatest risk of MI. CONCLUSIONS: ILD, particularly PF, is independently associated with MI and IHD after adjustment for established cardiovascular risk factors. Our results suggest clinicians should prioritise targeted assessment of cardiovascular risk in patients with ILD, particularly those aged 60-69 years. Further research is needed to understand the impact of such an approach to risk management.

The Hospital Frailty Risk Score and its association with in-hospital mortality, cost, length of stay and discharge location in patients with heart failure short running title: Frailty and outcomes in heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about frailty amongst patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) on a national level. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to hospital for HF in the United States. We examined how low, intermediate and high risk of frailty as defined by the Hospital Frailty Risk Score has changed over time and how it is related to inpatient mortality, length of stay, cost and discharge location. RESULTS: We included 11,626,400 inpatient episodes for HF. The proportions of patients that had low risk, intermediate and high risk of frailty were 80.0% (n = 9,300,873), 19.9% (n = 2,314,001) and 0.1% (n = 11,526). Intermediate or high risk of frailty increased from 9.9% in 2004 to 31.7% in 2014. Length of stay in hospital was greater in the high compared to low risk groups (11.3 days vs 4.6 days, respectively). The cost of admission was also greater in the high risk group ($23,084 ±â€¯39,681) compared to the low risk group ($9103 ±â€¯12,768). Intermediate and high risk of frailty groups were associated with increased in odds of mortality (OR 2.38 95% CI 2.22-2.34, p < 0.001 and OR 3.05 95%CI 2.57-3.62, p < 0.001, respectively) and discharge to nursing facilities (intermediate risk OR 1.52 95%CI 1.50-1.54, p < 0.001 and high risk OR 1.60 95%CI 1.35-1.90, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is significant and increasing in a national cohort of patients with HF in the United States. Patients at higher risk of frailty have increased in-hospital mortality, length of stay and inpatient costs, and a greater proportion are discharged to nursing home.

Early Unplanned Readmissions After Admission to Hospital With Heart Failure.

Hospital readmissions remain a continued challenge in the care of patients with heart failure (HF). This study aims to examine the rates, temporal trends, predictors and causes of 30-day unplanned readmissions after admission with HF. Patients hospitalized with a primary or secondary diagnosis of HF in the U.S. Nationwide Readmission Database were included. We examined the incidence, trends, predictors and causes of unplanned all-cause readmissions at 30-days. A total of 2,635,673 and 8,342,383 patients were included in the analyses for primary and secondary diagnoses of HF, respectively. The 30-day unplanned readmission rate was 15.1% for primary HF and 14.6% for secondary HF. Predictors of readmission in primary HF included renal failure (OR 1.27 (1.25 to 1.28)), cancer (OR 1.26 (1.22 to 1.29)), receipt of circulatory support (OR 2.81 (1.64 to 4.81)) and discharge against medical advice (OR 2.29 (2.20 to 2.39)). In secondary HF, the major predictors were receipt of circulatory support (OR 1.43 (1.12 to 1.84)) and discharge against medical advice (OR 2.01 95%CI (1.95 to 2.07)). In primary HF 52.4% of patients were readmitted for a noncardiac cause while for secondary HF 73.9% were readmitted for a noncardiac cause. For secondary HF, the strongest predictor of readmission was discharge against medical advice (OR 2.06 95%CI 2.01 to 2.12, p < 0.001). Early unplanned readmissions are common among patients hospitalized with HF, and a majority of readmissions are due to causes other than HF. Our results highlight the need to better manage comorbidities in patients with HF.

Venous thromboembolism in patients with gout and the impact of hospital admission, disease duration and urate-lowering therapy.

BACKGROUND: Systemic inflammatory diseases have been associated with increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We aimed to quantify the risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with gout, the most common inflammatory arthritis, and to assess how disease duration, hospital admission and urate-lowering therapy affect this risk. METHODS: We used data from the population-representative, England-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics, to identify incident gout cases between 1998 and 2017. We matched cases individually to 1 control without gout on age, gender, general practice and follow-up time. We calculated absolute and relative risks of venous thromboembolism, stratified by age, gender and hospital admission. Among those with gout, we assessed the risk of venous thromboembolism by exposure to urate-lowering therapy. RESULTS: We identified 62 234 patients with incident gout matched to 62 234 controls. Gout was associated with higher risk of venous thromboembolism compared with controls (absolute rate 37.3 [95% confidence interval (CI) 35.5-39.3] v. 27.0 [95% CI 25.5-28.9] per 10 000 person-years, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% CI 1.15-1.35). The excess risk in patients with gout, which was sustained up to a decade after diagnosis, was present during the time outside hospital stay (adjusted HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.18-1.42), but not during it (adjusted HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.83-1.24). The risk of venous thromboembolism was similar among patients prescribed versus not prescribed urate-lowering therapy (incidence rate ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.89-1.23). INTERPRETATION: Gout was associated with higher risk of venous thromboembolism, particularly when the patient was not in hospital and regardless of exposure to urate-lowering therapy. Although the observed excess risk may not be sufficient to warrant preventive intervention, clinical vigilance may be required when caring for these patients.

Multisite pain and self-reported falls in older people: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multisite pain and falls are common in older people, and isolated studies have identified multisite pain as a potential falls risk factor. This study aims to synthesise published literature to further explore the relationship between multisite pain and falls and to quantify associated risks. METHODS: Bibliographic databases were searched from inception to December 2017. Studies of community-dwelling adults aged 50 years and older with a multisite pain measurement and a falls outcome were included. Two reviewers screened articles, undertook quality assessment and extracted data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the effect estimate (odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI)). Heterogeneity was assessed by I2; sensitivity analyses used adjusted risk estimates and exclusively longitudinal studies. RESULTS: The search identified 49,577 articles, 3145 underwent abstract review, 22 articles were included in the systematic review and 18 were included in the meta-analysis. The unadjusted pooled OR of 1.82 (95%CI 1.55-2.13), demonstrating that those reporting multisite pain are at increased risk of falls, is supported by the adjusted pooled OR of 1.56 (95%CI 1.39-1.74). Multisite pain predicts future falls risk (OR = 1.74 (95%CI 1.57-1.93)). For high-quality studies, those reporting multisite pain have double the odds of a future fall compared to their pain-free counterparts. CONCLUSION: Multisite pain is associated with an increased future falls risk in community-dwelling older people. Increasing public awareness of multisite pain as a falls risk factor and advising health and social care professionals to identify older people with multisite pain to signpost accordingly will enable timely falls prevention strategies to be implemented.

Risk of chronic kidney disease in patients with gout and the impact of urate lowering therapy: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: An association between gout and renal disease is well-recognised but few studies have examined whether gout is a risk factor for subsequent chronic kidney disease (CKD). Additionally, the impact of urate-lowering therapy (ULT) on development of CKD in gout is unclear. The objective of this study was to quantify the risk of CKD stage ≥ 3 in people with gout and the impact of ULT. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Patients with incident gout were identified from general practice medical records between 1998 and 2016 and randomly matched 1:1 to patients without a diagnosis of gout based on age, gender, available follow-up time and practice. Primary outcome was development of CKD stage ≥ 3 based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or recorded diagnosis. Absolute rates (ARs) and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox regression models. Risk of developing CKD was assessed among those prescribed ULT within 1 and 3 years of gout diagnosis. RESULTS: Patients with incident gout (n = 41,446) were matched to patients without gout. Development of CKD stage ≥ 3 was greater in the exposed group than in the unexposed group (AR 28.6 versus 15.8 per 10,000 person-years). Gout was associated with an increased risk of incident CKD (adjusted HR 1.78 95% CI 1.70 to 1.85). Those exposed to ULT had a greater risk of incident CKD, but following adjustment this was attenuated to non-significance in all analyses (except on 3-year analysis of women (adjusted HR 1.31 95% CI 1.09 to 1.59)). CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated gout to be a risk factor for incident CKD stage ≥ 3. Further research examining the mechanisms by which gout may increase risk of CKD and whether optimal use of ULT can reduce the risk or progression of CKD in gout is suggested.

Factors Influencing Allopurinol Initiation in Primary Care.

Despite guidance on appropriate initiation, urate-lowering therapy is prescribed for only a minority of patients with gout. Electronic health records for 8,142 patients with gout were used to investigate the effect of age, sex, comorbidities, number of consultations, and meeting internationally agreed eligibility criteria on time to allopurinol initiation. Time to first prescription was modeled using multilevel Cox proportional hazards regression. Allopurinol initiation was positively associated with meeting eligibility criteria at diagnosis of gout, but negatively associated with becoming eligible after diagnosis. Managing gout as a chronic disease, with regular reviews to discuss allopurinol treatment, may reduce barriers to treatment.

Increased risk of vascular disease associated with gout: a retrospective, matched cohort study in the UK clinical practice research datalink.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether gout increases risk of incident coronary heart disease (CHD), cerebrovascular (CVD) and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) in a large cohort of primary care patients with gout, since there have been no such large studies in primary care. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Risk of incident CHD, CVD and PVD was compared in 8386 patients with an incident diagnosis of gout, and 39 766 age, sex and registered general practice-matched controls, all aged over 50 years and with no prior vascular history, in the 10 years following incidence of gout, or matched index date (baseline). Multivariable Cox Regression was used to estimate HRs and covariates included sex and baseline measures of age, Body Mass Index, smoking, alcohol consumption, Charlson comorbidity index, history of hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, chronic kidney disease, statin use and aspirin use. RESULTS: Multivariable analysis showed men were at increased risk of any vascular event (HRs (95% CIs)) HR 1.06 (1.01 to 1.12), any CHD HR 1.08 (1.01 to 1.15) and PVD HR 1.18 (1.01 to 1.38), while women were at increased risk of any vascular event, HR 1.25 (1.15 to 1.35), any CHD HR 1.25 (1.12 to 1.39), and PVD 1.89 (1.50 to 2.38)) but not any CVD. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of over 50s with gout, female patients with gout were at greatest risk of incident vascular events, even after adjustment for vascular risk factors, despite a higher prevalence of both gout and vascular disease in men. Further research is required to establish the reason for this sex difference.

Monitoring Osteoarthritis: A Cross-sectional Survey in General Practice.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a highly prevalent chronic condition managed predominantly in primary care and unlike other chronic conditions, osteoarthritis (OA) care is delivered on an ad hoc basis rather than through routine structured review. Evidence suggests current levels of OA care are suboptimal, but little is known about what general practitioners' (GPs) consider important in OA care, and, thus, the scope to improve inconsistency or poor practice is, at present, limited. OBJECTIVES: We investigated GPs' views on and practice of monitoring OA. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional postal survey of 2500 practicing UK GPs randomly selected from the Binley's database. Respondents were asked if monitoring OA patients was important and how monitoring should be undertaken. RESULTS: Responses were received from 768 GPs of whom 70.8% were male and 89.5% were principals within their practices. Despite 55.4% (n = 405) indicating monitoring patients with OA was important and 78.3% (n = 596) considering GPs the appropriate professionals to monitor OA, only 15.2% (n = 114) did so routinely, and 45% (n = 337) did not monitor any OA patients at all. In total, 61.4% (n = 463) reported that patients should self-monitor. Respondents favored monitoring physical function, pain, and analgesia use over monitoring measures of BMI, self management plans, and exercise advice. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents felt that monitoring OA was important, but this was not reflected in their reported current practice. Much of what they favored for monitoring was in line with published guidance, suggesting provision of suboptimal care does not result from lack of knowledge and interventions to improve OA care must address barriers to GPs engaging in optimal care provision.

Health-related quality of life in gout: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the instruments that have been used to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in gout and assess their clinimetric properties, determine the distribution of HRQOL in gout and identify factors associated with poor HRQOL. METHODS: Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched from inception to October 2012. Search terms pertained to gout, health or functional status, clinimetric properties and HRQOL. Study data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: From 474 identified studies, 22 met the inclusion criteria. Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and Short Form 36 (SF-36) were most frequently used and highest rated due to robust construct and concurrent validity, despite high floor and ceiling effects. The Gout Impact Scale had good content validity. Gout had a greater impact on physical HRQOL compared to other domains. Both gout-specific features (attack frequency and intensity, intercritical pain and number of joints involved) and comorbid disease were associated with poor HRQOL. Evidence for objective features such as tophi and serum uric acid was less robust. Limitations of existing studies include cross-sectional design, recruitment from specialist clinic settings and frequent use of generic instruments. CONCLUSION: Most studies have used the generic HAQ-DI and SF-36. Gout-specific characteristics and comorbidities contribute to poor HRQOL. There is a need for a cohort study in primary care (where most patients with gout are treated) to determine which factors predict changes in HRQOL over time. This will enable those at risk of deterioration to be identified and better targeted for treatment.

Should there be a Quality and Outcomes Framework domain for osteoarthritis? A cross-sectional survey in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a chronic condition with a high prevalence and significant associated morbidity that is managed predominantly in primary care, osteoarthritis (OA) does not feature in the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) component of the UK general practice contract. The aim of this study was to determine whether general practitioners (GPs) thought OA should be added as a QOF domain, and the potential items for inclusion. METHODS: A cross-sectional postal survey of 2500 UK GPs randomly selected from Binley's database of currently practising GPs was conducted. The survey asked if OA should be added as a domain to QOF, how many points should be allocated to it and what indicators should be included. RESULTS: Responses were received from 768 GPs, of whom 70.4% were male and 89.1% were partners in their practice. The majority (82.6%; n = 602) felt that OA should not be included as a QOF domain. Significant predictors of support for the addition of an OA domain to QOF included having a special interest in musculoskeletal disease (odds ratio [OR] 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-3.03), a higher research degree (OR 3.98, 95% CI 1.31-12.10) and having read the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance on the management of OA (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04-2.54). Being a GP principal was the only negative association (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23-0.99). Preferred potential indicators for an OA QOF were analgesia review, exercise advice and patient education. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents felt that OA should not be included as a QOF domain, although it is unclear whether this reflected views particular to OA, or on the addition of any new domain to QOF. Those supporting an OA QOF domain tended to prefer potential indicators that are in line with current published guidance, despite a significant proportion reporting that they had not read the NICE guidelines on the management of OA.