PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D M van der Heijde

Publications and source records attributed to D M van der Heijde.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

[The value of joint general practitioner and rheumatologist consultations in primary care patients].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of regular referral by general practitioners to the Rheumatology outpatients' clinic with that of joint consultations by general practitioners (GPs) and rheumatologists, and to compare the subsequent treatment policy followed. DESIGN: Randomised. METHOD: In 1999 and 2000 all rheumatological patients who, according to the 17 participating GPs in the Maastricht region had an indication for referral, were referred to the outpatients' clinic or seen during a joint consultation where three GPs and one rheumatologist decided on a treatment policy in the presence of the patient. Agreement about diagnosis and diagnostic and therapeutic approaches between the rheumatologists and GPs was determined using questionnaires. The patient's state of health was assessed using the 'EuroQol health-related quality of life questionnaire' (EuroQol) and their satisfaction was determined by means of questionnaires. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-six patients were included: 45 (27%) men and 121 (73%) women, with an average age of 53.7 years (SD: 14). The rheumatologists and the GPs differed in opinion on the diagnosis in 64% of the patients. Agreement on diagnosis resulted in greater agreement on the treatment policy than when there were discrepancies about the diagnosis. The rheumatologist used additional diagnostic tools and follow-up consultations at the outpatient clinic (78% and 65%) more frequently than during the joint consultation (44% and 15%). Patient satisfaction and general state of health were comparable in both groups.

Family Practice↗
PubMed2003

Joint consultation of general practitioner and rheumatologist: does it matter?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of joint consultation on referral behaviour of general practitioners (GPs) in a prospective cohort study. METHODS: All patients with rheumatological complaints that 17 participating GPs, from the area of the University Hospital Maastricht, wanted to refer during a two year inclusion period (n=166) were eligible for inclusion. These patients were either referred to the outpatient clinic, or presented at a joint consultation held every six weeks at the practice of the GP, where groups of three GPs presented their patients to a visiting, consulting rheumatologist. The number of patients referred by each GP a year at the end of the trial, comparing participating and non-participating GPs, was the main outcome measure. RESULTS: During two years of inclusion, the 17 participating GPs presented 166 patients. The number of patients referred by each GP a year decreased for the participating GPs by 62% at the end of the whole study. By contrast, non-participating GPs maintained the same rate of referral. The range of diagnoses remained proportionally the same throughout the study, with the exception of fibromyalgia. The referral rate of this diagnosis decreased significantly (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Joint consultation seems to be a good strategy in influencing the referral behaviour of GPs in the area of rheumatology. The decrease in referral is substantial and can subsequently lead to a reduction of waiting lists.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Modified sharp method: factors influencing reproducibility and variability.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In rheumatoid arthritis, joint radiography is still the most frequently used instrument to assess the progression of joint damage. Unfortunately, the poor quality of the radiographic scoring methods available has a negative impact on the power in clinical trials. This study focuses on the influence of the following 4 factors on radiographic scores according to van der Heijde's modification of the Sharp method: intraobserver variation, interobserver variation, follow-up time, and number of measurement occasions within a patient series. METHODS: One hundred and seventy-two patients in the early stages of rheumatoid arthritis were followed up. During the first 3 years, radiographs of the hands and feet were taken twice yearly and scored by 3 observers. The scoring process was repeated after an additional 3-year period. Correlation coefficients and differences between observers were calculated to define variability. The influence of the 4 factors on variability was studied. RESULTS: One observer assigned a significantly higher score than the other 2, who had been trained together. Interobserver variability decreased as follow-up time increased. Interobserver correlation coefficients became higher, with smaller differences between observers for progression scores than for absolute scores. Increasing the number of measurements within a patient series led to higher scores. Intraobserver correlation coefficients were high, and a training effect occurred when the time between measurements was 1 year, resulting in lower scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, and shows how, the investigated factors influence the variability of the modified Sharp method. It is extremely important to take interobserver variation into account when designing protocols for multicenter clinical trials. A progression scoring method is recommended for studies assessing radiographic damage or clinical trials.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed2001

Musculoskeletal manifestations in a population-based cohort of inflammatory bowel disease patients.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders are the most common extra-intestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Wide ranges of prevalence have been reported depending on the criteria used to define spondylarthropathy and on the selection of patients. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence and clinical spectrum of musculoskeletal manifestations in an inception cohort of European IBD patients. METHODS: From 1 October 1991 to 30 September 1993, 202 IBD patients were diagnosed in three centres of two countries (Italy and The Netherlands) by means of a population-based inception cohort study. Of this group of patients, 160 (79%) were interviewed and examined by a rheumatologist and a gastroenterologist in the period June-September 1996. A total of 139/160 patients had an antero-posterior radiograph of the pelvis, and in 140/160 HLA-B27 was determined. RESULTS: 53 (33.1%) of the 160 patients had experienced at least one musculoskeletal manifestation, 29 (18.1%) satisfied the European Spondylarthropathy Study Group (ESSG) criteria for spondylarthropathy and 5 (3.1%) satisfied the modified New York criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. However, 23 (14.4%) patients developed one or more spondylarthropathy-related manifestations without fulfilling any of the classification criteria. In patients satisfying ESSG criteria a significantly higher frequency of women (P = 0.03), of ocular and liver involvement (P = 0.01 and P = 0.03, respectively), and use of immunosuppressive drugs (P = 0.02) was observed. CONCLUSION: Our study shows a high prevalence of musculoskeletal manifestations in an inception cohort of IBD patients. The clinical spectrum is broader than that defined by spondylarthropathy criteria.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Infliximab and methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Trial in Rheumatoid Arthritis with Concomitant Therapy Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Neutralization of tumor necrosis factor a (TNF-alpha) for three to six months reduces the symptoms and signs of rheumatoid arthritis. However, the capacity of this approach to effect a more sustained benefit and its effect on joint damage are not known. METHODS: We treated 428 patients who had active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy with placebo or infliximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody against TNF-alpha, in intravenous doses of 3 or 10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 4 or 8 weeks in combination with oral methotrexate for 54 weeks. We assessed clinical responses with use of the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology, the quality of life with a health-status questionnaire, and the effect on joint damage radiographically. RESULTS: The combination of infliximab and methotrexate was well tolerated and resulted in a sustained reduction in the symptoms and signs of rheumatoid arthritis that was significantly greater than the reduction associated with methotrexate therapy alone (clinical response, 51.8 percent vs. 17.0 percent; P<0.001). The quality of life was also significantly better with infliximab plus methotrexate than with methotrexate alone. Radiographic evidence of joint damage increased in the group given methotrexate, but not in the groups given infliximab and methotrexate (mean change in radiographic score, 7.0 vs. 0.6, P<0.001). Radiographic evidence of progression of joint damage was absent in infliximab-treated patients whether or not they had a clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with persistently active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy, repeated doses of infliximab in combination with methotrexate provided clinical benefit and halted the progression of joint damage.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗
PubMed2000

Treatment of poor-prognosis early rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized study of treatment with methotrexate, cyclosporin A, and intraarticular corticosteroids compared with sulfasalazine alone.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a regimen of methotrexate, cyclosporin A, and corticosteroids introduced at onset in poor-prognosis rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can produce a significant improvement in outcome compared with standard monotherapy with sulfasalazine (SSZ). METHODS: Eighty-two consecutive patients presenting with new, untreated RA of less than 12 months' duration who fulfilled criteria for poor long-term outcome were randomized to receive either combination therapy (n = 40) or SSZ alone (n = 42). The primary outcome measures were remission and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for 20% improvement at 48 weeks. RESULTS: After 48 weeks, the numbers of patients who met the ACR criteria for 20% improvement were not significantly different between the two groups (combination 58% versus SSZ 45%), and similar numbers of patients had persisting clinical remission (approximately 10% both groups). During the first 3 months, there were significantly greater reductions in parameters of disease activity in the combination group. By 24 weeks, the swollen and tender joint counts, C-reactive protein levels, and erythrocyte sedimentation rates had fallen significantly in both groups, with a greater improvement in the swollen and tender joint count in the combination group. At 48 weeks, the radiographic damage score had increased by a median of 1 (range 0-42.5) in the combination group and 1.25 (range 0-72.5) in the SSZ group (P = 0.28; although there were significant differences in the scores for the right hand). There were significantly fewer withdrawals due to lack of efficacy in the combination group than in the SSZ group (1 of 40 versus 10 of 42; P = 0.007). In the combination group, dose reduction was needed in 22.5% because of hypertension and in 22.5% because of elevated creatinine levels. Over 48 weeks, serum creatinine increased in both groups, but particularly in the combination arm. CONCLUSION: In poor-prognosis RA patients, "aggressive" combination therapy led to more rapid disease suppression but did not result in significantly better ACR response or remission rates. This suggests that in poor-prognosis disease, an approach based on identifying patients with poor treatment responses before extra therapy is added ("step-up" approach) may be more appropriate than the use of combination therapy in all patients from the outset.

Adrenal Cortex Hormones↗
PubMed2000

The course of radiologic damage during the first six years of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the radiologic course in a large cohort of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to analyze individual components of damage. METHODS: Five hundred two patients with recent-onset RA (disease duration <1 year) underwent annual radiologic assessment for a maximum of 6 years in this longitudinal prospective study. The study was designed to investigate the efficacy of 3 different therapeutic strategies. For the assessment of radiologic damage, radiographs of the hands and feet were scored according to the modified Sharp/van der Heijde method (SHS; range 0-448). A mean of 2.9 (range 1-7) radiographs was read per patient. RESULTS: Stable rates of progression of the SHS, erosion score, and narrowing score were found over the course of RA: the mean rates were 8.6, 5.4, and 3.2 modified Sharp units per year, respectively. The rate of progression of newly (not previously) damaged joints declined, and the rate of progression of already damaged joints (which became more damaged) increased during followup, leading to an equal contribution to progression of the SHS at 5 years. The joints of the feet, especially the fifth metatarsophalangeal joint, generally became eroded earlier and more of them became eroded compared with the joints of the hands. CONCLUSION: Radiologic damage progresses at a constant rate. In advanced disease, monitoring the progression of previously existing damage is as important as assessing new abnormalities in previously undamaged joints. Radiographs of the feet should be included in assessments of radiologic damage that are used in clinical intervention trials and daily practice.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Radiographic imaging: the 'gold standard' for assessment of disease progression in rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by a chronic inflammation of the joints, which leads to the destruction of articular cartilage and bone. The degree of joint damage assessed by radiographic imaging represents a key outcome in RA. There are several methods for scoring the joint damage associated with RA. The most widely used are the Sharp and Larsen systems, as well as more recent modifications of each method. Radiographic imaging has several advantages compared with other outcome measures in RA, specifically: X-rays reflect the history of joint pathology, provide a permanent record for serial evaluation, and can be randomized and blinded for objective scoring. Several modifications of these methods have been proposed and employed in the investigation of disease progression. A review of the radiographic progression of RA is presented, as well as a simplified scoring system useful for the evaluation of joint damage in RA in a clinical setting.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed2000

Alternative methods for analysis of radiographic damage in a randomized, double blind, parallel group clinical trial comparing hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine.

Radiographic data of a 48-week double-blind, randomized, parallel trial comparing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and sulfasalazine (SASP) and its open label extension to 3 years of follow-up are analyzed in various ways. The focus of the paper is the methodological issues involved in analyses of radiographic data in a trial. Both the traditional method of increase in erosions and total score calculated on a group level, as well as individual progression on a patient level are presented. Regardless of which method is used, there is a statistically significant reduction in radiographic progression in the SASP group compared to the HCQ group.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2000

Assessing radiographic status of rheumatoid arthritis: introduction of a short erosion scale.

OBJECTIVE: Although radiographs are an important marker of rheumatoid arthritis severity, no valid simple scoring method exists. Current scoring systems are cumbersome, difficult to learn, time consuming, and suitable only for experts. In addition, there is no "gold standard" for radiographic severity, so that it is impossible for the clinician, trialist, or researcher to place patients' scores along a continuum of radiographic severity. We investigated the scoring and scaling properties of radiographs read by the Larsen method, and we developed a shortened scale that can be placed in the perspective of a linear severity continuum. METHODS: A total of 3,538 paired hand radiographs obtained over a 24 year period were read by Larsen method and evaluated by Rasch analysis. By iterative methods the number of joints was reduced so that proper fitting, scaling, and dimensionality were obtained. The shortened scale was then tested against the full Larsen scale to determine its ability to detect radiographic progression. RESULTS: A scale consisting of 6 joints on each hand (3 wrist areas and 3 metacarpophalangeal joints) performed as well as the full 28 joint Larsen score, and had improved fit and scaling properties. This Short Erosion Scale (SES) also performed as well as the Larsen score in measuring radiographic progression as measured by comparative effect sizes. In addition, a nomogram was developed to translate SES scores into radiographic severity scores according to a Rasch logit scale. CONCLUSION: We developed a Short Erosion Scale by reducing the number of joints evaluated in the Larsen method from 28 to 12. The scale is at least as sensitive in detecting change as the full Larsen scale. SES fits the Rasch model and is hierarchical and generally well spaced. Graphs and nomograms are available so that intrinsic radiographic severity can be documented. This scale is suitable for use in clinical practice and observational studies, and may be appropriate for clinical trials as well.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed1999

A practical exercise in reading RA radiographs by the larsen and sharp methods.

A plenary radiograph reading session was conducted prior to the rheumatoid arthritis imaging group sessions to familiarize participants with radiograph scoring methods and their problems, and to introduce the concept of measurement error. After brief reviews on how to score radiographs using the Larsen and Sharp method, photographic slides of metacarpophalangeal joints of 2 patients were shown. Participants were asked to register their absolute scores on paper, and their progression scores on an interactive voting keypad, allowing immediate visualization of the results. The objectives of the session were clearly met, as evidenced by lively discussions in the groups. Participant mean scores agreed well with the expert scores. Sharp scores showed wider scatter between participants than Larsen scores. This was only partially explained by the greater score range inherent in the method. In addition, participants needed more time to score according to Sharp than Larsen. Participants were sensitized to the challenges of radiographic measurement of damage.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed1999

Imaging in rheumatoid arthritis: results of group discussions.

None of the current scoring methods for radiological damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is ideal. The objective for RA imaging at OMERACT IV was to start discussion about the problems and applicability of the current scoring methods for radiological damage and to start discussion on the challenge of new imaging techniques. The RA imaging module comprised preconference reading material, plenary sessions, small group discussions, and a plenary report of the group sessions, combined with interactive voting. The OMERACT filter guided the discussions. Priorities for further research in imaging studies were: (1) pathologies versus features on radiographs; (2) relation with longterm outcome; and (3) definition of minimum clinically important difference.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed1998

Measures of outcome in ankylosing spondylitis and other spondyloarthritides.

This chapter describes core sets that can be used in the assessment of ankylosing spondylitis and other spondyloarthritides. Various core sets are described for the evaluation of disease-controlling antirheumatic therapy, symptom-modifying antirheumatic drugs and physical therapy, or for use in clinical record keeping. These core sets describe domains and also give advice on specific instruments. The value of spinal mobility and acute-phase reactants in the assessment of ankylosing spondylitis in AS are described in more detail. The available radiological scoring methods are discussed.

Acute-Phase Proteins↗
PubMed1997

[The value of roentgen pictures in rheumatoid arthritis].

Rheumatoid arthritis leads to many abnormalities in radiographs as a result of irreversible destruction of cartilage or underlying bone. Radiographs of hands and feet provide the most useful information. Erosions and joint space narrowing in particular can be assessed reliably, and give a good impression of the destruction of the joints. Several validated scoring methods are available to assess the severity and progression of joint damage. Abnormalities are already present shortly after onset of the disease. About 70% of the patients develop erosive disease and in the majority of the cases erosions are present one year after onset. Patients who are rheumatoid factor positive in particular develop erosions. Damage occurs earlier and is often more severe in the joints of the feet than in joints of the hands. The early occurrence of irreversible joint destruction and the availability of treatment effective in reducing this damage necessitates early treatment of patients with RA.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed1997

Randomised comparison of combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine with sulphasalazine alone in early rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The value of intensive combination therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis is unproven. In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial (COBRA), we compared the combination of sulphasalazine (2 g/day), methotrexate (7.5 mg/week), and prednisolone (initially 60 mg/day, tapered in 6 weekly steps to 7.5 mg/day) with sulphasalazine alone. METHODS: 155 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (median duration 4 months) were randomly assigned combined treatment (76) or sulphasalazine alone (79). Prednisolone and methotrexate were tapered and stopped after 28 and 40 weeks, respectively. The main outcomes were the pooled index (a weighted change score of five disease activity measures) and the Sharp/Van der Heijde radiographic damage score in hands and feet. Independent health-care professionals assessed the main outcomes without knowledge of treatment allocation. FINDINGS: At week 28, the mean pooled index was 1.4 (95% CI 1.2-1.6) in the combined treatment group and 0.8 (0.6-1.0) in the sulphasalazine group (p < 0.0001). At this time, 55 (72%) and 39 (49%) patients, respectively, were improved according to American College of Rheumatology criteria. The clinical difference between the groups decreased and was no longer significant after prednisolone was stopped, and there were no further changes after methotrexate was stopped. At 28 weeks, the radiographic damage score had increased by a median of 1 (range 0-28) in the combined-therapy group and 4 (0-44) in the sulphasalazine group (p < 0.0001). The increases at week 56 (2 [0-43] vs 6 [0-54], p = 0.004), and at week 80 (4 [0-80] vs 12 [0-72], p = 0.01) were also significant. Further analysis suggests that combined therapy immediately suppressed damage progression, whereas sulphasalazine did so less effectively and with a lag of 6 to 12 months. There were fewer withdrawals in the combined therapy than the sulphasalazine group (6 [8%] vs 23 [29%]), and they occurred later. INTERPRETATION: This combined-therapy regimen offers additional disease control over and above that of sulphasalazine alone that persists for up to a year after corticosteroids are stopped. Although confirmatory studies and long-term follow-up are needed, this approach may prove useful in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Can we predict aggressive disease?

This chapter will describe the reasons why prognostic factors that predict aggressive disease are helpful and what the problems are in interpreting studies in this field. A summary of cohort studies on prognosis of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis are presented. This is done separately for studies predicting radiographic damage, functional outcome and mortality. The overall conclusions of these studies and the value they have for the clinician are demonstrated.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed1997

Limited effect of sulphasalazine treatment in reactive arthritis. A randomised double blind placebo controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of sulphasalazine in reactive arthritis. METHODS: Double blind placebo controlled trial of six months duration comparing sulphasalazine 2-3 g per day (n = 37) with matching placebo (n = 42) in adults with active reactive arthritis (age 19-57 years, median 34). Treatment response was evaluated once a month by changes in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), pain, peripheral arthritis, tender iliosacral joints, entesopathy, extra-articular manifestations, and working ability. RESULTS: 15 patients in the sulphasalazine group and eight in the placebo group withdrew from the study prematurely. Adverse events, primarily gastrointestinal, were the main reason for withdrawal in the actively treated group. Intention-to-treat analyses showed significant improvements over time in both groups in ESR, pain, and number of swollen joints (P < 0.01). Number of days on sick leave decreased significantly in the sulphasalazine group only (P < 0.01). No significant differences between the two groups were present after six months. Among the patients completing the trial according to protocol, persistent complete remission had occurred within two months in five (23%) of the actively treated, but in no placebo treated patients (P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Sulphasalazine seemed to improve only the very short term outcome of reactive arthritis. The possible beneficial effect of the drug should also be weighed against the risk of adverse events. Although these were mainly mild, almost 25% of the patients in the actively treated group gave up treatment for this reason.

Adult↗