ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1354

A Comparison of Convergent Validity and Sensitivity to Change of the Conventional Scoring Method to Alternative Scoring Methods of the Health Assessment Questionnaire in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Lai Ling Winchow 1, Nimmisha Govind 1, Eustasius Musenge 2, Arvind Chopra 3, Thomas Huizinga 4 and Mohammed Tikly1, 1Chris hani baragwanath academic hospital, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, 3Center for rheumatic diseases, Pune, India, 4Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands

Meeting: 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

Keywords: rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and functional status

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 11, 2019

Title: RA – Diagnosis, Manifestations, & Outcomes Poster II: Treatments, Outcomes, & Measures

Session Type: Poster Session (Monday)

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: The HAQ disability index (HAQ-DI) is the most widely used disease-specific measure of physical disability in RA. This study explores the sensitivity to change of 3 scoring methods of the HAQ-DI in relation to disease activity in active RA patients.

Methods: Patient data was extracted from an international RA database, the Measurement of Efficacy of Treatment in the Era of Outcome in Rheumatology (METEOR) database. All adult patients fulfilling the 2010 ACR/EULAR RA classification criteria with complete data with respect to the 20 questions of the HAQ-DI and components of the DAS28 (4 variable) using the ESR (DAS28-ESR(4)) for 2 visits at least 6 – 12 months apart with high disease activity at visit 1, (DAS28-ESR(4) > 5.1) were included in the study. Three scoring methods of the HAQ-DI: 1) the conventional method (HAQ-8), 2) the Tomlin method (HAQ-T) and 3) the 20-item method (HAQ-20) were analysed against the EULAR response criteria dichotomized for good/moderate response group versus the no response group. The proportion of patients achieving the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of the HAQ-DI was compared in the EULAR responder and non-responder groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent predictors of achieving a minimally clinical important improvement (MCII) (improvement in HAQ-DI ≥ 0.22) of the HAQ-DI.

Results: Of the 5 539 patients in the METEOR database at the time of data extraction, 421 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age (SD) and disease duration (SD) of this cohort of patients were 55.0 (13) years and 10.5 (9.5) years respectively at visit 1.  The median DAS28-ESR(4) (IQR) declined from 5.9 (5.4-6.6) to 5.2 (3.7-6.0) over a mean period (SD) of 8.7 (1.9) months and 47 % of patients had a good/moderate EULAR response. Median HAQ-8 (IQR) improved from 1.6 (1.1-2.1) to 1.4 (0.9-1.9); median HAQ-T (IQR) improved from 1.2(0.7-1.6) to 0.7 (0.4-1.4) and median HAQ-20 improved from 1.2 (0.8-1.6) to 0.9 (0.5-1.4) with similar effect sizes. All three scoring methods showed good agreement. The proportion of patients who achieved the MCII of the HAQ-DI was significantly higher in the EULAR good/moderate response group (64%) compared to the EULAR no response group (11%). The strongest independent predictor of achieving a MCII of the HAQ-DI is EULAR response. The odds of achieving a MCII of the HAQ-8 is 7.11 higher if a good/moderate EULAR response is achieved compared to having no response.

Conclusion: The 3 methods performed similarly in assessing sensitivity to change with no particular advantage using alternative methods of scoring compared to the conventional method of scoring the HAQ-DI. By achieving a good or moderate EULAR response over 60% of RA patients with long-standing disease can attain a clinically significant improvement in their physical function.


Disclosure: L. Winchow, None; N. Govind, None; E. Musenge, None; A. Chopra, None; T. Huizinga, Abblynx, 2, 5, 8, Abbott, 2, 5, 8, Biotest AG, 2, 5, 8, Boehringer Ingelheim, 2, 5, 8, Boeringher Ingelheim, 2, 5, 8, Bristol-Myers Squibb, 2, 5, 8, Crescendo Bioscience, 2, 5, 8, Eli Lilly, 2, 5, 8, Epirus, 2, 5, 8, Galapagos, 2, 5, 8, Janssen, 2, 5, 8, Merck, 2, 5, 8, Novartis, 2, 5, 8, Nycomed, 2, 5, 8, Pfizer, 2, 5, 8, Roche, 2, 5, 8, Sanofi, 2, 5, Sanofi-Aventis, 2, 5, 8, Takeda, 2, 5, 8, UCB, 2, 5, 8, Zydus, 2, 5, 8; M. Tikly, None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Winchow L, Govind N, Musenge E, Chopra A, Huizinga T, Tikly M. A Comparison of Convergent Validity and Sensitivity to Change of the Conventional Scoring Method to Alternative Scoring Methods of the Health Assessment Questionnaire in Rheumatoid Arthritis [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-comparison-of-convergent-validity-and-sensitivity-to-change-of-the-conventional-scoring-method-to-alternative-scoring-methods-of-the-health-assessment-questionnaire-in-rheumatoid-arthritis/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/a-comparison-of-convergent-validity-and-sensitivity-to-change-of-the-conventional-scoring-method-to-alternative-scoring-methods-of-the-health-assessment-questionnaire-in-rheumatoid-arthritis/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology