Objective: Physical function is one of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core outcome domains for hand osteoarthritis studies. Our aim was to select appropriate instrument(s) to... Show moreObjective: Physical function is one of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core outcome domains for hand osteoarthritis studies. Our aim was to select appropriate instrument(s) to measure this domain, as part of the development of a core outcome measurement set.Methods: Following the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection process, the (function subscale of) the Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index (AUSCAN), Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) and Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) were assessed for domain match, feasibility, truth and discrimination. Data gathered from available literature, working group and patient surveys, and additional analyses in two hand osteoarthritis cohorts were used to inform a consensus process.Results were summarized in Summary of Measurements Properties tables and reviewed by the OMERACT technical advisory group. Results: MHQ passed the assessment of domain match and feasibility by the working group and patient research partners. For AUSCAN important limitations in feasibility were noted, but domain match was good. FIHOA did not pass the assessment and was not taken through the follow-up assessment. Based on published literature, reliability and construct/longitudinal validity of both MHQ and AUSCAN fulfilled OMERACT standards. While clinical trial discrimination and thresholds of meaning were good for AUSCAN, results for MHQ were ambiguous.Conclusion: MHQ was provisionally endorsed as OMERACT core outcome measure for the core domain physical function. While AUSCAN may have better metric properties than MHQ, it received provisional endorsement as a second measure of function due to important feasibility issues. A research agenda to merit full endorsement was set. (c) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. Show less
Objectives: To compare reliabilities of assessing synovitis in hand osteoarthritis (OA) using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) with/without gadolinium (Gd). Methods: Three readers scored synovitis... Show moreObjectives: To compare reliabilities of assessing synovitis in hand osteoarthritis (OA) using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) with/without gadolinium (Gd). Methods: Three readers scored synovitis on non-enhanced two-dimensional (2D) proton density (PD)weighted MRI and Gd-enhanced (3D) MRI of hand joints in 20 patients. Inter-reader reliabilities were examined. Results: Reliability was good for Gd-enhanced MRI, but poor for non-enhanced PD-weighted MRI (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.83 and 0.21, respectively). Agreement between the two sequences was poor (weighted kappa 0.18). Conclusion: Gd-enhanced MRI was more reliable than PD-weighted MRI for assessing synovitis. Gd-enhancement, but also resolution and tissue contrast, might have contributed to this. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
King, L.K.; Epstein, J.; Cross, M.; Buzzi, M.; Buttel, T.; Cembalo, S.M.; ... ; Guillemin, F. 2021
Objective: Towards developing an instrument to measure knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) flare, the Out-come Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Flares in OA Working Group first sought to identify... Show moreObjective: Towards developing an instrument to measure knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) flare, the Out-come Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Flares in OA Working Group first sought to identify and define relevant domains of flare in KHOA.Methods: Guided by OMERACT Filter 2.1, candidate domains were identified from data generated in inter-views, in English or French, with persons with KHOA and health professionals (HPs) who treat OA. The first and second rounds of an online Delphi process with patients and HPs, including researchers, selected rele-vant domains. The third round provided agreement on the selected domains and their definitions. At the vir-tual OMERACT 2020 workshop, the proposed domains and their definitions were discussed in facilitated breakout groups with patients and HPs. Participants then voted, with consensus set at >= 70%.Results: Qualitative interviews characterizing OA flare were completed with 29 persons with KHOA and 16 HPs. Content was analyzed and grouped into nine clusters. These candidate domains were included in two Delphi rounds, completed by 91 patients and 165 HPs then 50 patients and 116 HPs, per round, respectively. This resulted in selecting five relevant domains. A final Delphi round, completed by 38 patients and 89 HPs, provided agreement on these domains and their definitions. The OMERACT virtual vote included 27 patients and 106 HPs. The domains and their definitions were endorsed with >= 98% agreement. Domains include: Pain, Swelling, Stiffness, Psychological aspects, and Impact of symptoms, all defined "during flare".Conclusion: Using OMERACT methodology, we have developed five domains of KHOA flare that were highly endorsed by patients and HPs. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
Toupin-April, K.; Decary, S.; Wit, M. de; Meara, A.; Barton, J.L.; Fraenkel, L.; ... ; Tugwell, P. 2021
Objective: To gain consensus on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials of shared decision making (SDM) interventions.Methods: The process followed... Show moreObjective: To gain consensus on the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials of shared decision making (SDM) interventions.Methods: The process followed the OMERACT Filter 2.1 methodology, and used consensus-building methods, with patients involved since the inception. After developing the draft core domain set in previous research, we conducted five steps: (i) improving the draft core domain set; (ii) developing and disseminating whiteboard videos to promote its understanding; (iii) conducting an electronic survey to gather feedback on the draft core domain set; (iv) finalizing the core domain set and developing summaries, a plenary session video and discussion boards to promote its understanding; and (v) conducting virtual workshops with voting to endorse the core domain set.Results: A total of 167 participants from 28 countries answered the survey (62% were patients/caregivers). Most participants rated domains as relevant (81%-95%) and clear (82%-93%). A total of 149 participants (n = 48 patients/caregivers, 101 clinicians/researchers) participated in virtual workshops and voted on the proposed core domain set which received endorsement by 95%. Endorsed domains are: 1-Knowledge of options, their potential benefits and harms; 2-Chosen option aligned with each patient's values and preferences; 3-Confidence in the chosen option; 4-Satisfaction with the decision-making process; 5-Adherence to the chosen option and 6-Potential negative consequences of the SDM intervention.Conclusion: We achieved consensus among an international group of stakeholders on the OMERACT core domain set for rheumatology trials of SDM interventions. Future research will develop the Core Outcome Measurement Set.Clinical significance: Prior to this study, there had been no consensus on the OMERACT core domain set for SDM interventions. The current study shows that the OMERACT core domain set achieved a high level of endorsement by key stakeholders, including patients/caregivers, clinicians and researchers.(c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
Roe, Y.; Buchbinder, R.; Grotle, M.; Whittle, S.; Ramiro, S.; Huang, H.M.; ... ; Ostensjo, S. 2020
Objective. The objective of this paper is to assess the content and measurement constructs of the candidate instruments for the domains of "pain" and "physical function/activity" in the Outcome... Show moreObjective. The objective of this paper is to assess the content and measurement constructs of the candidate instruments for the domains of "pain" and "physical function/activity" in the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) shoulder core set. The results of this International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF)-based analysis may inform further decisions on which instruments should ultimately be included in the core set.Methods. The materials for the analysis were the 13 candidate measurement instruments within pain and physical function/activity in the shoulder core domain set, which either passed or received amber ratings (meaning there were some issues with the instrument) in the OMERACT filtering process. The content of the candidate instruments was extracted and linked to the ICF using the refined linking rules. The linking rules enhance the comparability of instruments by providing a comprehensive overview of the content of the instruments, the context in which the measurements take place, the perspectives adopted, and the types of response options.Results. The ICF content analysis showed a large variation in content and measurement constructs in the candidate instruments for the shoulder core outcome measurement set.Conclusion. Two of 6 pain instruments include constructs other than pain. Within the physical function/activity domain, 2 candidate instruments matched the domain, 3 included additional content, and 2 included meaningful concepts in the response options, suggesting that they should be omitted as candidate instruments. The analyses show that the content in most existing instruments of shoulder pain and functioning extends across core set domains. Show less
Otobo, T.M.; Conaghan, P.G.; Maksymowych, W.P.; Heijde, D. van der; Weiss, P.; Sudol-Szopinska, I.; ... ; Doria, A.S. 2019
Objective. To update the 1997 OMERACT-OARSI (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International) core domain set for clinical trials in hip and/or knee osteoarthritis ... Show moreObjective. To update the 1997 OMERACT-OARSI (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International) core domain set for clinical trials in hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA).Methods. An initial review of the COMET database of core outcome sets (COS) was undertaken to identify all domains reported in previous COS including individuals with hip and/or knee OA. These were presented during 5 patient and health professionals/researcher meetings in 3 continents (Europe, Australasia, North America). A 3-round international Delphi survey was then undertaken among patients, healthcare professionals, researchers, and industry representatives to gain consensus on key domains to be included in a core domain set for hip and/or knee OA. Findings were presented and discussed in small groups at OMERACT 2018, where consensus was obtained in the final plenary.Results. Four previous COS were identified. Using these, and the patient and health professionals/researcher meetings, 50 potential domains formed the Delphi survey. There were 426 individuals from 25 different countries who contributed to the Delphi exercise. OMERACT 2018 delegates (n = 129) voted on candidate domains. Six domains gained agreement as mandatory to be measured and reported in all hip and/or knee OA clinical trials: pain, physical function, quality of life, and patient's global assessment of the target joint, in addition to the mandated core domain of adverse events including mortality. Joint structure was agreed as mandatory in specific circumstances, i.e., depending on the intervention.Conclusion. The updated core domain set for hip and/or knee OA has been agreed upon. Work will commence to determine which outcome measurement instrument should be recommended to cover each core domain. Show less
