Article

Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States: Part I

CDC, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3717, USA.
Arthritis & Rheumatology (Impact Factor: 7.87). 01/2008; 58(1):15-25. DOI: 10.1002/art.23177
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To provide a single source for the best available estimates of the US prevalence of and number of individuals affected by arthritis overall, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile arthritis, the spondylarthritides, systemic lupus erythematosus, systemic sclerosis, and Sjögren's syndrome. A companion article (part II) addresses additional conditions.
The National Arthritis Data Workgroup reviewed published analyses from available national surveys, such as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). For analysis of overall arthritis, we used the NHIS. Because data based on national population samples are unavailable for most specific rheumatic conditions, we derived estimates from published studies of smaller, defined populations. For specific conditions, the best available prevalence estimates were applied to the corresponding 2005 US population estimates from the Census Bureau, to estimate the number affected with each condition.
More than 21% of US adults (46.4 million persons) were found to have self-reported doctor-diagnosed arthritis. We estimated that rheumatoid arthritis affects 1.3 million adults (down from the estimate of 2.1 million for 1995), juvenile arthritis affects 294,000 children, spondylarthritides affect from 0.6 million to 2.4 million adults, systemic lupus erythematosus affects from 161,000 to 322,000 adults, systemic sclerosis affects 49,000 adults, and primary Sjögren's syndrome affects from 0.4 million to 3.1 million adults.
Arthritis and other rheumatic conditions continue to be a large and growing public health problem. Estimates for many specific rheumatic conditions rely on a few, small studies of uncertain generalizability to the US population. This report provides the best available prevalence estimates for the US, but for most specific conditions, more studies generalizable to the US or addressing understudied populations are needed.

Full-text

Available from: Hilal Maradit Kremers, Nov 26, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
157 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an inflammatory disease that affects the craniovertebral junction (CVJ). Patients may suffer from atlantoaxial instability (AAI) and basilar invagination (BI) with variable presentations ranging from pain to quadriparesis. Managing these patients is often challenging due to their chronic use of steroids, methotrexate, and biologics; which impedes bone and wound healing. We report our experience with the surgical management of these patients undergoing fusions at the CVJ. We conducted a retrospective study identifying all patients with the diagnosis of RA who underwent spinal fusions at our institution over the past 11 years. A total of 205 patients were identified amongst which 18 patients (8.8%) who underwent 20 fusions involving the CVJ. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic data were analyzed. Five patients had AAI and 13 patients had BI. Two patients with C1-2 fusions underwent reoperation: One for pseudoarthrosis and one for BI. The average preoperative Nurick was 1.4 and improved to 0.5 postoperatively (P < 0.001). After conducting analyses stratified by dichotomous preoperative variables, the presence of steroids, methotrexate, biologics, and prednisone dosage less than 7.5 mg did not affect outcomes. Prednisone dosages ≥7.5 mg had significantly smaller improvements in Nurick score compared to patients not on steroids or on prednisone dosages <7.5 mg (0.40 vs 1.36, P = 0.042). Similarly, patients on biologics had significantly smaller improvements in Nurick score compared to patients not on biologics (0.27 vs 1.16, P = 0.038). Fusions at the CVJ in patients with RA on daily prednisone dosages of less than 7.5 mg and/or methotrexate can be performed safely with good outcomes, fusion rates, and acceptable complication profiles. Daily prednisone dosages of more than 7.5 mg or biologics may impact clinical outcomes.
    Journal of craniovertebral junction and spine 04/2015; 6(2). DOI:10.4103/0974-8237.156044
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rheumatic conditions can have a significant impact on the feet and requires effective management. Podiatric involvement in the management of rheumatic conditions has previously been found to be inadequate in a hospital-setting and no study has examined current trends across New Zealand. The aim was to evaluate the perceived barriers of New Zealand podiatrists in the management of rheumatic conditions. A cross-sectional observational design using a web-based survey. The self-administered survey, comprising of thirteen questions, was made available to podiatrists currently practicing in New Zealand. Fifty-six podiatrists responded and the results demonstrated poor integration of podiatrists into multidisciplinary teams caring for patients with arthritic conditions in New Zealand. Dedicated clinical sessions were seldom offered (16%) and few podiatrists reported being part of an established multidisciplinary team (16%). A poor uptake of clinical guidelines was reported (27%) with limited use of patient reported outcome measures (39%). The majority of podiatrists expressed an interest in professional development for the podiatric management of arthritic conditions (95%). All surveyed podiatrists (100%) agreed that there should be nationally developed clinical guidelines for foot care relating to arthritis. The results suggest that there are barriers in the involvement of podiatrists in the management of people with rheumatic conditions in New Zealand. Future studies may provide an in-depth exploration into these findings to identify and provide solutions to overcome potential barriers.
    Journal of Foot and Ankle Research 04/2015; 8(1):14. DOI:10.1186/s13047-015-0071-z · 1.83 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the comparative effectiveness of febuxostat and allopurinol in reducing serum urate (sUA) levels in a real-world U.S. managed care setting. This retrospective study utilized 2009 to 2012 medical and pharmacy claims and laboratory data from a large U.S. commercial and Medicare Advantage health plan. Study patients had at least one medical claim with a diagnosis of gout, at least one filled prescription for febuxostat or allopurinol and at least one sUA measurement post-index prescription. Reduction in sUA was examined using propensity score-matched cohorts, matched on patient demographics (gender, age), baseline sUA, comorbidities, geographic region and insurance type. The study sample included 2,015 patients taking febuxostat and 14,025 taking allopurinol. At baseline, febuxostat users had a higher Quan-Charlson comorbidity score (0.78 vs. 0.53; P <0.001), but similar age and gender distribution. Mean (standard deviation (SD)) sUA level following propensity score matching among treatment-naïve febuxostat vs. allopurinol users (n = 873 each) were: pre-index sUA, 8.86 (SD, 1.79) vs. 8.72 (SD, 1.63; P = 0.20); and post-index sUA, 6.53 (SD, 2.01) vs. 6.71 (SD, 1.70; P = 0.04), respectively. A higher proportion of febuxostat users attained sUA goals of <6.0 mg/dl (56.9% vs. 44.8%; P <0.001) and <5.0 mg/dl (35.5% vs. 19.2%; P <0.001), respectively. Time to achieve sUA goals of <6.0 mg/dl (346 vs. 397 days; P <0.001) and <5.0 mg/dl was shorter in febuxostat vs. allopurinol users (431 vs. 478 days; P <0.001), respectively. Similar observations were made for overall propensity score-matched cohorts that included both treatment-naïve and current users (n = 1,932 each). Febuxostat was more effective than allopurinol at the currently used doses (40 mg/day for febuxostat in 83% users and 300 mg/day or lower for allopurinol in 97% users) in lowering sUA in gout patients as demonstrated by post-index mean sUA level, the likelihood of and the time to achieving sUA goals.
    Arthritis research & therapy 05/2015; 17(1):120. DOI:10.1186/s13075-015-0624-3 · 4.12 Impact Factor