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: 918

Assessment of the Temporal Variation of the Fibromyalgia Patient Profile Between 2005 and 2013: Do Guidelines Inform Clinical Care?

Angeliki Karellis1,2, Emmanouil Rampakakis1, Peter A. Ste-Marie3, Yoram Shir3, John S. Sampalis1,4 and Mary-Ann Fitzcharles3,5, 1JSS Medical Research, St-Laurent, QC, Canada, 2Department of Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada, 3Alan Edwards Pain Management Unit, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada, 4McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada, 5Division of Rheumatology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada

Meeting: 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Date of first publication: September 29, 2015

Keywords: Diagnostic criteria, fibromyalgia and guidelines

  • 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: Sunday, November 8, 2015

Title: Fibromyalgia: Insights Into Diagnostic Criteria and Symptom Epidemiology

Session Type: ACR Concurrent Abstract Session

Session Time: 2:30PM-4:00PM

Background/Purpose:

In the last decade, interest in fibromyalgia (FM) has increased with the publication of revised diagnostic criteria and clinical guidelines. The 2010 and revised 2011 ACR criteria emphasized the polysymptomatic nature of FM. National FM guidelines (Germany, Canada & Israel) showcased the importance of sustained functionality, multimodal therapy ideally targeting the primary symptom/s and cautioned the likely modest effect for most drug treatments.  Whether recommendations influenced clinical care remains speculative. We examined the profile and clinical care of FM Canadian patients in two time periods to assess the effect of this paradigm change.

Methods:

FM patients followed prospectively at a Montreal university based tertiary care pain clinic from 2005 to 2013 were recruited. Disease severity was measured with pain visual analog scale (VAS), patient global assessment (PGA), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Pain Disability Index (PDI), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS) the latter including anxiety and depression subscales. Differences between enrolment period groups (2005-08 vs 2009-13) were assessed for statistical significance with the chi-square test for categorical variables and the independent-samples t-test for continuous variables.

Results:

Table 1 presents the profile of 248 FM patients stratified by enrolment period: 147 patients in 2005-08 and 101 patients in 2009-13. The mean ± SD age of patients was 47.9 ± 10.3 years (2005-08 vs 2009-13: 49.3 ± 9.71 vs 45.9 ± 10.94; p=0.012). The majority (91.1%) of patients were female (p=0.179). Mean ± SD disease duration was 10.8 ± 9.80 years (p=0.851). Significant between-group differences (2005-08 vs 2009-13) of mean ± SD scores were observed for PDI (36.1 ± 15.10 vs 40.0 ± 13.21; p=0.036), FIQ (65.1 ± 18.24 vs 69.8 ± 14.18; p=0.029) and AIMS depression (5.1 ± 1.64 vs 4.5 ± 2.05; p=0.005). Statistical trends were observed in regard to medication use: 2005-08 patients used more analgesics (24.5% vs 15.8%; p=0.114) and NSAIDs (26.5% vs 17.8%, p=0.126) but less antiepileptics (27.9% vs 38.6%, p=0.097). Exercise activity was more prevalent among 2009-13 patients (23.8% vs 39.6%; p=0.011). The 2009-13 group had lower disability rates (39.5% vs 18.8%; p=0.001), higher employment rates in manual and service areas (37.2% vs 16.3%) and lower rates in health care or educational areas (31.9% vs 58.1%) (p<0.001).

Conclusion: FM patient profile changes in the past decade may have been informed by recent guidelines. Despite similar pain durations at presentation and generally greater symptom severity, FM management has trended away from traditional analgesic medication use. Maintained function with more patients employed and participating in exercise activity reflects the evolving concept of FM care.

Table 1 Clinical Features of FM Patients According to Enrolment Period

Parameter

Enrolment Period

P-value

Total

2005 – 2008

2009 – 2013

Age, years, mean ± SD

49.3 ± 9.71

45.9 ± 10.94

0.012

47.9 ± 10.3

Gender

   Female (%)

93.2

88.1

0.179

91.1

   Male (%)

6.8

11.9

8.9

Marital Status

   Single (%)

21.1

23.7

0.720

22.1

   Married (%)

62.6

62.9

62.7

   Divorced (%)

11.6

11.3

11.5

   Widowed (%)

4.8

2.1

3.7

Education level

   Less than high school (%)

44.2

34.3

0.128

40.2

   College (%)

29.3

41.4

34.1

   University (%)

26.5

24.2

25.6

Employment Status

   Employed or Unemployed due to other reasons (%)

60.5

81.2

0.001

69.0

   Disabled (%)

39.5

18.8

31.0

Type of Occupation

   Manual or Service (%)

37.2

16.3

0.012

31.4

   Education, Health, Office, Professional or Student (%)

62.8

83.7

68.6

Analgesic use (%)

24.5

15.8

0.114

21.0

NSAID use (%)

26.5

17.8

0.126

23.0

Antiepileptic use (%)

27.9

38.6

0.097

32.3

Tricyclic antidepressant use (%)

23.1

18.8

0.435

21.4

Other antidepressant use (%)

40.1

49.5

0.154

44.0

Alternative product use (%)

4.8

5.9

0.775

5.2

Medication count, mean ± SD

2.3 ± 1.39

2.1 ± 1.58

0.493

2.2 ± 1.47

Chiropractor/ osteopath/ massage (%)

17.0

11.9

0.283

14.9

Acupuncture (%)

6.1

2.0

0.208

4.4

Exercise (%)

23.8

39.6

0.011

30.2

Physiotherapy (%)

10.9

10.9

>0.999

10.9

Alternative medicine (%)

4.8

6.0

0.774

5.3

Pain duration, mean ± SD

10.9 ± 9.71

10.7 ± 9.97

0.851

10.8 ± 9.80

Pain VAS, mean ± SD

6.4 ± 2.33

6.7 ± 2.22

0.299

6.5 ± 2.3

PGA, mean ± SD

6.5 ± 2.42

6.7 ± 1.94

0.439

6.6 ± 2.24

MPQ, mean ± SD

41.5 ± 15.87

39.8 ±14.32

0.394

40.8 ± 15.25

PDI, mean ± SD

36.1 ± 15.10

40.0 ± 13.21

0.036

37.7 ± 14.46

PCS, mean ± SD

29.3 ± 12.19

29.6 ± 12.26

0.836

29.4 ± 12.20

FIQ, mean ± SD

65.1 ± 18.24

69.8 ± 14.18

0.029

67.0 ± 16.83

HAQ, mean ± SD

1.1 ± 0.67

1.1 ± 0.64

0.652

1.1 ± 0.66

AIMS anxiety, mean ± SD

6.2 ± 1.86

6.6 ± 1.80

0.086

6.3 ± 1.85

AIMS depression, mean ± SD

5.2 ± 1.64

4.5 ± 2.05

0.005

4.9 ± 1.84

AIMS, Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales; FIQ, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire; HAQ; Health Assessment Questionnaire; MPQ, McGill Pain Questionnaire; NSAID, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; PCS, Pain Catastrophizing Scale; PDI, Pain Disability Index; PGA, patient global assessment; VAS, visual analog scale.

Statistically significant (p<0.05) results in bold; statistical trends (p<0.15) in italic.


Disclosure: A. Karellis, JSS Medical Research, a Contract Research Organization, 3; E. Rampakakis, JSS Medical Research, a Contract Research Organization, 3; P. A. Ste-Marie, None; Y. Shir, None; J. S. Sampalis, JSS Medical Research, a Contract Research Organization, 3; M. A. Fitzcharles, Amgen, 5,Abbott Laboratories, 5,Lilly, 5,Bristol-Myers Squibb, 5,Purdue Pharma L.P., 5,Lilly, 8,Johnson & Johnson, 8,Janssen Pharmaceutica Product, L.P., 8,Pfizer Inc, 5,Johnson & Johnson, 5,Janssen Pharmaceutica Product, L.P., 5,Abbvie, 9.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Karellis A, Rampakakis E, Ste-Marie PA, Shir Y, Sampalis JS, Fitzcharles MA. Assessment of the Temporal Variation of the Fibromyalgia Patient Profile Between 2005 and 2013: Do Guidelines Inform Clinical Care? [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015; 67 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/assessment-of-the-temporal-variation-of-the-fibromyalgia-patient-profile-between-2005-and-2013-do-guidelines-inform-clinical-care/. 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 2015 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/assessment-of-the-temporal-variation-of-the-fibromyalgia-patient-profile-between-2005-and-2013-do-guidelines-inform-clinical-care/

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