Article

Evidence and consensus based GKJR guidelines for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis

HELIOS Children's Hospital, Krefeld, Germany.
Clinical Immunology (Impact Factor: 3.99). 10/2011; 142(2):176-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.clim.2011.10.003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in children and adolescents. Immunomodulatory drugs are used frequently in its treatment. Using the nominal group technique (NGT) and Delphi method, we created a multidisciplinary, evidence- and consensus-based treatment guideline for JIA based on a systematic literature analysis and three consensus conferences. Conferences were headed by a professional moderator and were attended by representatives who had been nominated by their scientific societies or organizations. 15 statements regarding drug therapy, symptomatic and surgical management were generated. It is recommended that initially JIA is treated with NSAID followed by local glucocorticoids and/or methotrexate if unresponsive. Complementing literature evidence with long-standing experience of caregivers allows creating guidelines that may potentially improve the quality of care for children and adolescents with JIA.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ina Kopp, Jun 27, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
200 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Die juvenile idiopathische Arthritis (JIA) ist die häufigste chronisch-entzündliche Erkrankung im Kindes- und Jugendalter. In Deutschland liegt die Inzidenz bei etwa 4–7 pro 100.000 Kinder und Jugendliche unter 16 Jahren, die Zahl an Neukrankungen beträgt etwa 1000 pro Jahr. Bei der Diagnosestellung wird aktuell die ILAR-Klassifikation (ILAR: „International League of Associations for Rheumatology“) zugrunde gelegt. Demnach liegt eine JIA vor bei Arthritis eines oder mehrerer Gelenke, die für mindestens 6 Wochen anhält und vor dem 16. Geburtstag des Patienten beginnt. Andere Erkrankungen, die ähnliche Symptome verursachen können, müssen ausgeschlossen sein. Es werden 8 verschiedene Subgruppen der JIA unterschieden. Hieraus ergeben sich subgruppenspezifische Implikationen für mögliche Organbeteiligungen, Therapie und Prognose.Die vorliegende Handlungsempfehlung beruht auf der entsprechenden AWMF-Leitlinie (AWMF: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der wissenschaftlichen medizinischen Fachgesellschaften ...
    Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde 01/2012; 161(1):60-62. DOI:10.1007/s00112-012-2837-8 · 0.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Control of disease activity and recovery of function are major issues in the treatment of children and adolescents suffering from juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Functional therapies including physiotherapy are important components in the multidisciplinary teamwork and each phase of the disease requires different strategies. While in the active phase of the disease pain alleviation is the main focus, the inactive phase requires strategies for improving motility and function. During remission the aim is to regain general fitness by sports activities. These phase adapted strategies must be individually designed and usually require a combination of different measures including physiotherapy, occupational therapy, massage as well as other physical procedures and sport therapy. There are only few controlled studies investigating the effectiveness of physical therapies in JIA and many strategies are derived from long-standing experience. New results from physiology and sport sciences have contributed to the development in recent years. This report summarizes the basics and main strategies of physical therapy in JIA.
    Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie 06/2012; 71(5):387-95. DOI:10.1007/s00393-011-0867-6 · 0.46 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The eye is probably the most attractive site of the body for treatment using locally delivered therapeutic agents. An ideal indication for such an approach is noninfectious posterior uveitis. Since intraocular structures of the posterior segment are difficult to reach and are otherwise accessible only by systemic treatment, current interest is focused on the pros and cons of intravitreal drug delivery. Because of its chronic and recurrent nature, the long-term release of anti-inflammatory agents is a major treatment goal. Intravitreal injections, intravitreal implants and biodegradable devices are the most commonly used and approved approaches to deliver various agents to the vitreous. Because of their broad and potent effects, corticosteroids (CS) have been the first-line candidates for intraocular delivery. An increasing spectrum of CS preparations including nondegradable and biodegradable devices is currently available. Since repeated and long-term applications bear the risk of steroid-related complications such as increased intraocular pressure and cataract, alternative agents are currently being tested. Intravitreal injection of methotrexate, anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor), anti-TNFα (tumor necrosis factor α) and sirolimus have also been applied in patients with conflicting results. Intravitreal treatment has significantly reduced the incidence of adverse effects compared to systemic application, but due to greater ocular side effects there are still some limitations.
    Ophthalmic Research 12/2012; 49(2):59-65. DOI:10.1159/000345477 · 1.38 Impact Factor