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: 1723

The Development of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Patient Priorities in Pharmacological Intervention Outcome Measures

Tessa Sanderson1, John R. Kirwan2, Marianne Morris1, Jon Pollock3, Robert Noddings2, Anne Watts2 and Sarah Hewlett4, 1University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom, 2Academic Rheumatology Unit, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol, United Kingdom, 3Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom, 4Academic Rheumatology, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom

Meeting: 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

Keywords: Outcome measures, Patient questionnaires, quality of life and rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

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

Title: Care of Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Session Type: Abstract Submissions (ARHP)

Background/Purpose: Previous research developed a set of 8 priority treatment outcomes generated by patients to complement the professionally developed ACR core set for RA. These outcomes were pain, activities of daily living (ADL), visible joint damage, mobility, life enjoyment, independence, fatigue, and valued activities.¹ This abstract reports face validity in existing instruments (Phase 1), and the construction of new Numerical Rating Scales (NRS) where validated measures did not exist (Phase 2).

Methods: Phase 1: Two consultation meetings with patient research partners (N=18) were held. Patient research partners discussed and voted on their preferences for scales identified in the literature for each of the 8 priorities, except VJD (no scales could be found).

Phase 2: Two focus groups with RA patients (N=8) were facilitated. Draft scales constructed from the Phase 1 discussions were used. Feedback on the stem question, time frame, anchors and layout was recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Results: Existing NRS for pain², ADL² and fatigue³ were voted as acceptable. However, patient research partners strongly recommended that severity of, importance of and ability to cope with each priority outcome be assessed, resulting in 24 questions (21 new). Visual joint damage created the most discussion, with concerns that the word ‘damage’ would be upsetting to newly diagnosed patients. PRP understood ‘mobility’ diversely, but a consensus was reached that it should focus on ‘getting around outside the home’. In relation to valued activities, patients stressed that the stem question should focus on current activities, not those valued pre-diagnosis: “It needs to say ‘currently’.  You know, if you’re asking about how a drug changes your life over four months, or six months or whatever it is, you know, it’s kind of what your current expectation, how that’s changed” (PE, p.30). Feedback on layout included making the questions in each domain visually separate using shaded boxes, underlining key words and putting the instructions in bullet points.

Conclusion: Existing instruments did not capture the patient perspective in 5 of the 8 priority outcomes. User involvement has been essential in developing the new patient-reported outcomes. An ongoing study will test the sensitivity of the 24 RAPP-PI NRS compared to the Disease Activity Score. 

¹Sanderson et al. AC&R 2010;62(5):647-656. ²Gossec et al. ARD 2011;70:935-942. ³Nicklin et al. AC&R 2010;62(11):1559-1568.


Disclosure:

T. Sanderson,
None;

J. R. Kirwan,

Horizon Pharma (formerly Nitec Pharma), AstraZeneca, CombinatoRx, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Wyeth,

5;

M. Morris,
None;

J. Pollock,
None;

R. Noddings,
None;

A. Watts,
None;

S. Hewlett,
None.

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

« Back to 2012 ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/the-development-of-the-rheumatoid-arthritis-patient-priorities-in-pharmacological-intervention-outcome-measures/

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