A survey of outcome measurement procedures in routine rheumatology outpatient practice in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which quantitative clinical measurement is performed by rheumatologists in the longitudinal followup of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and fibromyalgia (FM) in routine outpatient practice in Australia. METHODS: A cross sectional postal survey was conducted using an 18-item self-administered questionnaire sent to Australian Rheumatology Association (ARA) members. RESULTS: Rheumatologists (response rate = 76%, completion rate = 72%) were more likely to longitudinally follow patients with RA and AS than those with OA or FM. There was a high degree of variability in the methods used to monitor patients longitudinally. Many measures used in clinical research were used infrequently in routine clinical practice. In general, the major health status measures surveyed were not used in clinical monitoring. There was a high level of agreement (> 80%) that the characteristics required of an outcome measure for use in clinical practice should include simplicity, brevity, ease of scoring, reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. CONCLUSION: The majority of Australian rheumatologists perform outcome measurement during the longitudinal followup of their outpatients with RA, AS, OA, and FM. However, the process lacks standardization. High performance health status measures developed for clinical research have not been widely adopted in rheumatology practices. There is agreement on the characteristics required by Australian rheumatologists for measurement procedures used in routine clinical care. Quantitative measurement in clinical practice using standardized procedures is an attainable, but as yet, unrealized opportunity.

Risk factors for osteoporosis and fracture in patients attending rheumatology outpatient clinics.

BACKGROUND: Bone mineral density (BMD) using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning is the best predictor of osteoporotic fracture but may not be cost effective for all patient groups. Risk factors (RF) other than BMD may be useful for fracture prediction. AIM: To assess the prevalence of RF for osteoporosis (OP) and fracture in patients attending a public hospital rheumatology clinic and to document physician awareness of these RF. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty rheumatology outpatients completed a self-administered questionnaire pertaining to known RF for OP and fracture. Initiatives were documented by the treating rheumatologist. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-four females and 66 males completed questionnaires: 57% had an inflammatory disorder and 32% had received significant glucocorticoid therapy. Forty-five (68%) males and 126 (82%) females had three or more RF for OP and fracture. Diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis or connective tissue disorder (CTD) was the variable most significantly associated with increasing numbers of RF. Antiosteoporotic medication (AOM) use at assessment (64/219, 29.2%) was accounted for primarily by the use of hormone replacement therapy in females between 45-54 years. Prednisolone use predicted intervention in 103 (48%) patients. CONCLUSION: Many rheumatology outpatients have multiple RF for OP and fracture. Infrequent AOM use could be explained by inadequate awareness of high risk patients and the lack of an ideal long term agent. With restricted outpatient resources, the feasibility of identifying high risk patients for OP and fracture would increase if the hierarchical status of RF was better understood.

Rheumatoid arthritis antirheumatic drug trials: effects of a standardized instructional videotape on the reliability of observer-dependent outcome measures.

AIMS: A study was designed to assess the effects of a standardized instructional videotape on reducing interobserver variability for several commonly used observer-dependent outcome measures. METHODS: During a single day, six rheumatologists independently examined six patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a predetermined order using a Latin square design, before and after viewing a standardized videotape demonstrating 13 examination techniques. Reliability coefficients were calculated based on the variance components of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) table. RESULTS: Prestandardization reliability coefficients were >0.80 for all measures and remained above 0.80 following standardization. CONCLUSIONS: It is usually assumed that serial measurement in clinical trials should be performed by the same assessor because of concern regarding interobserver variability. However, the high levels of prestandardization interobserver reliability observed in this study indicate that, for these variables, serial measurements in a clinical trial could be made by different assessors, assuming they were equally skilled. This observation has important implications for outcome measurement in RA clinical trials. Although high levels of prestandardization reliability precluded the demonstration of any significant effect, we speculate that the videotape might be effective in training less-experienced assessors. Reductions in observer variability have the potential to diminish sample size requirements for RA antirheumatic drug studies. The use of a videotape to achieve this goal offers cost and convenience advantages over one-on-one training procedures, and this method should be further assessed in less-experienced assessors.

Ankylosing spondylitis antirheumatic drug trials: Effects of a standardized instructional viddeotape on the reliability of observer-dependent outcome measures.

AIMS: A study was designed to assess the effects of a standardized instruction videotape on reducing interobserver variability for several commonly used observer-dependent outcome measures. METHODS: During a single day, six rheumatologists independently examined six patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in a predetermined order using a Latin square design, before and after viewing a standardized videotape demonstrating 14 examination techniques. Reliability coefficients were calculated based on the variance components of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) table. RESULTS: Prestandardization reliability coefficients were <0.80 for three measures. Following standardization 12 reliability coefficients exceeded 0.80. For the majority of measures prestandardization reliability coefficients were high and no further improvement in reliability could be demonstrated. For one measure of cervical extension, but not another, an important and beneficial effect in reliability was noted. It was not possible to achieve adequate reliability in the performance of the chest excursion measurement. CONCLUSIONS: It is usually assumed that serial measurement in clinical trials should be performed by the same assessor because of concern regarding interobserver variability. However, the high levels of prestandardization interobserver reliability observed in this study indicate that for these variables serial measurements in a clinical trial could be made by different assessors, assuming they were equally skilled. This observation has important implications for outcome measurement in AS clinical trials. Although high levels of prestandardization reliability precluded the demonstration of any significant effect, we speculate that the videotape might be effective in training less experienced assessors. Nevertheless, an alternative approach to standardization may be required for the chest excursion measurement. Reductions in observer variability have the potential to diminish sample size requirements for AS antirheumatic drug studies. The use of a videotape to achieve this goal offers cost and convenience advantages over one-on-one training procedures, and this method should be further assessed in a group of less experienced assessors.

A case of polymicrobial infective endocarditis involving Neisseria mucosa occurring in an intravenous drug abuser.

The incidence of polymicrobial endocarditis has increased markedly in recent years, in association with the increasing level of abuse of intravenous drugs. Neisseria mucosa, an upper respiratory tract commensal, is a rare cause of infective endocarditis. We report the first case of polymicrobial infective endocarditis involving Neisseria mucosa occurring in an intravenous drug abuser.