High Prevalence of Undiagnosed Axial Spondyloarthritis in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain Consulting Non-Rheumatologist Specialists in Belgium: SUSPECT Study.

INTRODUCTION: Diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) can be delayed for several years mainly because of low awareness of axial SpA among non-rheumatologists who are the first interlocutors of potential SpA patients. One strategy to decrease the delay between appearance of first symptoms and diagnosis of axial SpA and to allow early management of the disease is to provide the non-rheumatologists with tools to identify patients requiring prompt referral to rheumatologists. This study was designed to evaluate in a real-world setting whether screening patients with chronic low back pain who consult physical medicine and rehabilitation (PMR) physicians, orthopedists, and ophthalmologists is useful in detecting axial SpA. METHODS: During this non-interventional cross-sectional study, data from 161 patients with chronic back pain, consulting an orthopedist, PMR physician, or ophthalmologist were collected during a single visit. Any patient who presented with at least four out of five symptoms of inflammatory back pain (IBP) and at least one additional SpA feature were to be referred to a rheumatologist. Analysis was purely descriptive. RESULTS: IBP was diagnosed in approximately half of the patients (89 patients) and 72 of them met the referral criteria. A total of 117 patients were finally referred to a rheumatologist and axial SpA was diagnosed for 37 of them. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of undiagnosed axial SpA in patients with chronic back pain visiting PMR physicians, orthopedists, and ophthalmologists suggests that these healthcare professionals may play a key role in the strategy developed to shorten the delay observed in the formal diagnosis of SpA. FUNDING: Abbvie.

Treatment patterns in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: results from a Belgian cross-sectional study (DISCOVER).

PURPOSE: The present study aimed to evaluate current treatment patterns and achievement of treatment goals in Belgian patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study (DISCOVER) was conducted in 2011 - 2012 in Belgian dermatology centers. Patient data were collected during a single visit and included information on psoriasis management and severity (PASI and DLQI). Treatment success was defined according to the current European consensus treatment goal algorithm. RESULTS: Of the 556 patients included in the study, 38.1% reported no current treatment or only topicals, 34.2% were being treated with traditional systemics and/or phototherapy, and 29.5% with biologics. Methotrexate (11.7%) was the most commonly prescribed traditional systemic and adalimumab (14.2%) was the most commonly prescribed biologic agent at the time of the study. The percentage of patients achieving treatment goals was significantly higher in biologic-treated patients (73.1%) compared to those using traditional systemics (50.6%), phototherapy (41.1%), or no treatment/only topicals (20.9%; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 40% of Belgian patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis in the DISCOVER study were undertreated despite the severity of their disease. Undertreatment of psoriasis remains a problem in Belgium and more effective educational strategies are needed to ensure the best treatment outcome for these patients. [Formula: see text].

Survey on treatment of hypertension and implementation of World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension risk stratification in primary care in Belgium.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into the prevalence, treatment and control of hypertension and into the implementation of the 1999 World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension in general practice in Belgium. DESIGN: A prospective cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Primary care. METHODS: Participating physicians enrolled the first 15 men, at least 55 years old, who visited the surgery, measured their blood pressure with a validated automatic device and recorded data on age, medical history, drug utilization, cardiovascular risk factors and target organ damage. Patients were considered to have hypertension when systolic blood pressure was >or= 140 mmHg, diastolic blood pressure was >or= 90 mmHg or when they were under antihypertensive therapy. RESULTS: Among 3761 evaluable patients, 74% were considered to be hypertensive, 80% of whom were treated with antihypertensive drugs. Blood pressure was under control in 38% of the treated patients and in 31% of all hypertensives. Among the 1316 hypertensive patients in whom risk stratification was possible, 47, 56 and 86% of the patients in, respectively, the medium, high and very high risk groups were treated with antihypertensive drugs. Among the treated patients, 46, 37 and 31%, respectively, had reached goal pressure. Within each risk category, patients were treated more frequently when baseline blood pressure was higher. Logistic regression analysis revealed that hypertension grade and level of risk contributed independently to the odds of being treated. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that a large number of older hypertensive men are treated with antihypertensive drugs in primary care, but that the goal blood pressure is not reached in a substantial number of patients due to undertreatment. Furthermore, whereas patients at higher risk are treated more frequently than patients at lower risk, blood pressure itself remains an important factor for the initiation of antihypertensive drug therapy within each risk category.